Cool News
Newsweek gets the first look at KING KONG!
Hey Folks, Harry here... I know, I know... I should rename the site, AINT IT KONG NEWS - don't think I haven't thought of it. I love the story of KING KONG. Not only is KING KONG my favorite film, but it's responsible for my love of various "primitive" cultures. You walk into my house - and what you're first struck by isn't film memoribilia, but masks (from cultures around the world), Zulu spears, Amazonian Arrows, a dagger from Borneo... then you turn and begin to see the obvious influence of film - THE HOUND OF THE BASKERVILLES, REBEL WITHOUT A CAUSE and the FRANKENSTEIN MEETS THE WOLFMAN posters... and only if you notice the reflection on the far wall of the dining room do you see evidence of my original KONG poster. This morning - bright and early I got sent the following press release from NEWSWEEK that they had Devin Gordon's story and account of having seen the mostly complete version of KING KONG. If you go to their site, linked at the bottom of the below article, you'll read a far more complete account - and if you click on the "AUDIO CLIP" offered under the "NEWSWEEK ON THE AIR" you'll hear the two rather stuffy sounding hosts of their PODSHOW interviewing Devin Gordon who is just enthusing about his take on KING KONG. Tomorrow - KING KONG will be finished, the prints will begin to all be struck for the world-wide release, and Peter Jackson and "family" will be boarding planes for a nearly 20 hour flight to NEW YORK - to begin the hellacious press junketeering and premiere. If you want to know how Peter is going to watch the premiere of his film... He wrote me this weekend. He's going to sit with the original KING KONG armature in his lap, the 18" one that Bob Burns has. That should tell you a bit about Peter, and just how much love went into this.
JACKSON WANTED SENSE THAT KONG IS 'GRIZZLED AND SCARRED BECAUSE IT TELLS A STORY OF BEING ALONE,' SAYS SCREENWRITER BOYENS
New York-Director Peter Jackson's $207 million remake of "King Kong" is three hours long, a difference from the 1933 original, which was 100 minutes. "A few people have already asked me why we're taking twice as long to tell essentially the same story," Jackson tells Newsweek. "And I don't really know. We've been asking that ourselves. I'm going to have to come up with a better answer."
Senior Writer Devin Gordon, who got an exclusive first look at the film when he accepted Jackson's invitation and flew halfway around the world to see it, writes that perhaps the best answer is the movie itself. "If the 44-year-old Kiwi felt any pressure over following up 'The Lord of the Rings,' you won't find a hint of it on screen," Gordon writes in the December 5 issue of Newsweek (on newsstands Monday, November 28). "Some critics will complain that the film's length is an act of Oscar-drunk hubris, but while 'Kong' may be indulgent, it's not pretentious. And it's certainly never dull. Jackson has honored his favorite film in the best possible way: by recapturing its heart-pounding, escapist glee."
Gordon writes that one of the major differences in the remake is Kong. Jackson's ape is pushing 50 years old, his jaw is offset and his right eyebrow droops from long-ago scrapes with dinosaurs. His fur is matted and mucky, with bald patches here and there from the scar tissue. "Peter really wanted a sense that Kong is old and grizzled and scarred," says Philippa Boyens, Jackson's screenwriter, "because it tells a story of being alone. And of having to survive in the most dangerous place on earth."
Kong's existence is pure brutality-until Ann Darrow (Naomi Watts, in the role made iconic by Fay Wray) comes along. "She sparks his curiosity," Jackson says. "It's the first time he's ever empathized with another living creature." Ann, thinking the rest of her shipmates are dead, comes to depend on Kong for protection. Their relationship is poignantly drawn-although after Kong is dragged to New York City in chains, there's a scene on a frozen pond in Central Park that tilts toward the corny. Gordon writes that it must have made Jackson impatient too. He ends it abruptly with a giddy blast of artillery fire.
Another difference from the original is Ann Darrow's love interest, Jack Driscoll (Adrien Brody) was the ship's first mate in the 1933 version; this time around, he is filmmaker Carl Dehnam's (Jack Black) screenwriter.
# # # (Read article at www.Newsweek.com
-
+ Expand All
-
but I do wonder if 3 hours is a bit long. Don't get me wrong, I'm looking forward to this as much as anyone, except for Harry! It should really be a fun ride. And I guess this means that AICN is about to be inundated with press screening reviews of Kong!
-
..I didn't have to watch it vis a shitty pirate here in China.Fuck,its either that or sit in a movie hall with Kong in Chinese and about 500 chin's hecking up greenys in their throat and spitting them out on the floor.Fucking horrible.
-
I say 130M. Worldwide release.
-
I mean if they want it to be successful surely they should start to promote it? Maybe if this site has any spare room they could squeeze in an inch or two to mention it? And maybe Empire magazine could spare a few lines for it because otherwise this babys gonna bomb
-
and Peter Jackson can't even explain why. Thats bad. I'm not sitting through a so-so movie for 3 hours. I'll pass for a few weeks and see what some of my friends think of it. Those who aren't obsesed with King Kong. It might be considered biased.
-
After his heir plain lands in America, I hope he has a bawl. Maybe he'll have a bowl of serial and discuss the movie'scymbalism.
-
Nov 27, 2005 11:16:34 AM CST
Can't wait for this... And I'm thinking a 75-90M opening
by negative man
In the end though, I can really give a flying leap about what a movie makes. Who really should care other than those monetarily invested in the end? I only care if it was good and worth my time/money I'm spending on it. But that's my guess. It's three hour running time will cut into profits. Plus Harry Potter is still going to have a showing and Narnia should be going strong as well. Three high end fantasy movies in the same time frame may split the cash pot smaller for Kong.
-
We all know that 'Gink Gonk' will beat 'King Kong' this Christmas.
-
and is all grizzled and battle-scarred, and is "tell(ing) a story of being alone." Sounds like PJ is really identifying with his leading monkey. I'd actually be more interested in this if it were about a 50-foot Peter Jackson rampaging through New York. Come on- mentally replace Kong's face with PJ's in the footage you've seen so far. Pretend it's Mad Magazine, only with CGI. Admit it- it's more entertaining that way.
-
Nov 27, 2005 11:27:03 AM CST
Kong will make approxiametly $100 over the first 5 days release.
by r.c. the "wise"
It will probably make around $70 million over that first weekend.
-
Thats the link to the article
-
Nov 27, 2005 11:46:52 AM CST
ANYONE CAN MAKE THE SAME MOVIE< JACKSON YOUR FAT ASS YOUR OVERAT
by tommy west
PETER JACKSON IS THE MOST OVERATED F**CKER IN THE WORLD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
Nov 27, 2005 11:58:16 AM CST
Can't wait for the opening of next years MTV Movie Awards.
by derlanghaarige
I'm sure it will be Kong related. But...3 hours? If Jackson is really able to make a 180 minute long film about a giant gorilla, that feels like a much shorter film, he will be my hero forever! Worst case: 180 minutes which feel like Pulp Fiction.
-
It will run until next summer and rule the world...Last time I made such a preditction was for Harry Potter#1, and I said it would be the 2nd highest grossing movie of all time, which it was until ROTK came along.
-
Is this supposed to be a review here or what!? Stop wasting my time.
-
He's the only working director in Hollywood right now with enough creative freedom to tell the studio "I'm gonna make a 3 hour movie" and they won't think twice about letting him do it. Do you know how many directors would love to have that freedom? Besides, directors should be allowed to make 3 hour films if they want to. Who are you to give a time length on their work? When the studios cut up a directors work it loses crutial elements that the director specifically wanted in their to tell the story he was trying to tell.
-
over and over again ever since the trailer that was on access hollywood 3 weeks ago my parents were all like, "oh, we'll all go see king kong when it comes out" and they gape at the poster for 11 minutes every time it pops up at our movie theather or the mall but i am thinking everytime this goes on "my parents don't even know that when this come out, they will be sitting though 3 FREAKING HOURS OF A HUGE MONKEY, the pianist, jack black and the main reason we HAVE lord of the rings movies in the first place! my dad won't even sit though a effin' movie that long. he won't even watch a movie without an aisle seat. and my mom can't even go on a roller coaster and she sat through two hours and seven minutes of spider man 2. i was never a fan of king kong because i used to think king kong was the most cringe-inducing, frightning thing ever. when i was 6 years old i was dragged on the universal studios ride and i was so scared i hid myself under my dad's shirt. ugh. well, now that my fears of the big ape have been put to rest because that was an unpleasant moment that only lasted 4 minutes and they replaced the king kong ride for the mummy ride and i'm 19 in a month from thursday, i can say this about everything i just typed..... i can't wait till the movie comes out and blows us all out of the freaking water, the burger king promotion will be dynamite and if i do see this with my awesome parents...i'll hope for the best.{beats chest like king kong and roars}.
-
...and wankers, stop wasting talkback space with box office predictions. Your guesses are ultimately useless and mean nothing. There's entire sites dedicated to this nonsensical activity where you can rant and rave all you like. Box office is very important, but your guesses are not.
-
big monkey
-
Nov 27, 2005 12:23:24 PM CST
Genius or not, not all directors should be given carte blanche s
by w3bzpinn3r
Certain movies, yes.... more time would be wonderful... such as Goblet of Fire. The Triwizard Tournament seemed to be in fast forward... by the time I thought "Damn, that dragon looked cool!" the other two challenges were over, and Raph Fienes was whisper/mumbling his lines. An extra 10 or 15 minutes for the Triwizard tournament, as well as the Quidditch cup at the beginning, would have been perfect.
however, other movies, the director should have been given far LESS time. such was the case for Revenge of the Sith... should have had the opening crawl, Sidius's overacting with Mace & Anakin's pledge, Anakin strangling padme, cut to Kenobi slicing Anakin into the lava, cut to NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!, fade to twins being born, end credits. The whole movie SHOULD have been only 15 minutes long.
That being said, I give full props to Jackson if he manages to make me love this Kong as much as the original. Hopefully the 3 hours are about Kong, and not another Jurassic Park... the trailer has WAY too many dinosaur shots for my liking. Wow... my post took 3 hours! -
Counting down the days until release is painful. PAINFUL!!
-
you'd think Peter Jackson actually did something to these dweebs to deserve the hate-trips they spew here. what is it that creates the kind of psychological make-up to drive someone to spend the time and energy to come up with that shit? early childhood molestation? sexual identity confusion? deforming acne? severe diaper rash? a third nipple? just think how infuriating it will be to them watching King Kong get positive reviews and rack up big numbers at the box office, since they seem to take Jackson's success as some sort of personal affront to them, as if their lives are somehow adversely affected because other people enjoy Jackson's work. fucking pathetic.
-
Here are my favorites so far: the guy who called Peter Jackson a fatass, and the guy who asks if he liked it or not and stop wasting my time. Would you rather click on this story and it just says "guy from Newsweek liked King Kong" and that's it? Or maybe Harry could establish abbreviations so it would just say something like "NW: KK+" and then it would waste less of your time. Also I wanted to let you know they got this new invention called Gogurt, so you don't have to waste your time actually eating yogurt with a spoon, you just drink it so it's faster because you're so on the go and what not. Same thing with soup, soup on the go so you can drink both soup and yogurt, pour some nodoz and some speed in there and chug those bithces while you're driving hurriedly to your important destination and not reading an article about King Kong or some stupid bullshit like that because your life is way too important for that although not too important to write a talkback about it, adding to the time wasted by accidentally seeing that there was part of an article about King Kong printed on the internet rather than a summary. Anyway, the answer is yes, he liked it. Now I'm gonna end this talkback because I have imp. things 2 do & it waste time
-
Reads like a plant - no opinions, recycled quotes and tells us nothing new.
-
I thought they were more, like, bushy and indifferent. Go ape go!
-
"He's the only working director in Hollywood right now with enough creative freedom to tell the studio "I'm gonna make a 3 hour movie" and they won't think twice about letting him do it." Hmm, I'm thinking Spielberg, Lucas, Scorcese (sp?), Cameron (if he ever works again) could all do the same. Probably others like Zemeckis, Howard and Tarantino too.
-
I mean seriously, it might look like everything is wonderful, but it also looks like the appologists are in full swing readyness for an over long over blown film. You can see this in a) the reporter has been flown by Jackson b) The reporter does make mention of the films length, pretentious, maybe not. But definately self indulgent. Thats great, but unfortunately the couple million people seeing this film 'are not' Peter Jackson! And whats this shit, Jacksons going to sit with the original ape on his lap? Whats that going to prove? That he's a mad man and nothing but a show off. Fine line between pretentious and self indulgent I think. But yeah I'm looking forward to seeing this thing. Can't wait for the 'after' talkback. Soooo Can't wait.
-
...you really need to get laid.
-
This is not hate email, this is observation. you did read the article, yes? no? or are you just reading over talkback looking for someone to fuck with?
-
...that diminishes his credibility? what kind of logic is that?
-
did he?
-
because its pretty obvious that the writer did like it very much, he just didn't write the words, "i like it".
-
This movie inspired PJ to be become the filmmaker he is today and according to the Article in Empire that the Universal Top brass have seen the final film and it blew them out of the private studio. One exec was shcoked to discover that the film was three hours long because he was under the impression he just seen 2 hr film. So this is one film I will be going to see....
-
But that doesn't matter, cos his Kong will whup all your asses. How do I know? Because he's a hugely successful film director, and we'r sitting here posting on talkback. You know it's true.
-
Lets see those people make three previously unfilmabale books back to back and win 11 oscars. Go on off you go......
-
Nov 27, 2005 2:08:00 PM CST
"JACKSON WANTED SENSE THAT KONG IS 'GRIZZLED AND SCARRED BEC
by indiana clones
Great. A film about and for losers. This is gonna be so popular. Strand, anyone?
-
Nov 27, 2005 2:09:24 PM CST
I'll accept the film if it handles this one scene better tha
by citizen arcane
Kong's rampaging through the city, the army's blowing shit up trying to kill him and suddenly everything becmes quiet and Kong sneaks up behind Ann (or Dwan) and deftly picks her up like a pickpocket lifting a wallet. Goofy scene in both films. I want to see how Jackson handles it. Maybe she willingly goes with him. Once you go Kong you need that huge dong. There's a new book out that details all the creatures of skull isle. There are like dozens of them and I know most of them won't be in the film but I wonder if there are a few that we haven't seen yet. It is a 3 hour film afterall.
-
Nov 27, 2005 2:09:34 PM CST
I'm glad the article says Serkis "got tight" with a female g
by ol' painless
Rather that "went tight!" ***Rimshot** Monkey love!! Now THAT would be some method acting!! This is no gorilla, sir!! This is my wife!! What does Kong rhyme with?? You got it!! Hey!! I'm using too many exclamation marks!! Maybe the thought of monky love has got me unreasonable excited!! I hope not!! I'm a married man!!
-
Nov 27, 2005 2:13:27 PM CST
Ok, you guys have to knock off the "well you go make your own mo
by citizen arcane
I know it's hip to rip on all the TBers now that Kevin Smith came in here with all his bitterness but being a filmmaker is not a pre-requisite to criticizing a film. I'm a software developer and I don't tell end users to get a CS degree before they can bitch about my work. What you're saying is that you don't agree with the very concept of a TB so you shouldn't be here to begin with.
-
because he'll have his Howard the Duck action figure to keep him company.
-
And three hours of Kong isn't too long for me. I would have been dissappointed if it was only 100 minutes. I hope most of the movie is on Skull Island.
-
Nov 27, 2005 2:34:02 PM CST
Since ROTK people have been pissy over movie lengths. It's t
by performingmonkey
People are SO FUCKING OBSESSED with movie lengths now that it's gone too far. It's ever since ROTK's 'endings' became a media story. People feel that their fragile world is being damaged if they have to put themselves through the immense pain of seeing a long movie. I think it's because the idea of not fucking with your phone or iPod for three hours is worse than death. Seriously, I challenge you to sit through a movie of any length without texting someone. Fuck you. King Kong will be the greatest movie of 2005, hands down. However, I assume that the phrase 'Jackson's 3 hour monkey movie' will follow it everywhere and disuade people from seeing it. Fuck you. Fuck you.
-
Over dinner and a few glasses of white wine at an Italian restaurant in downtown Wellington, she (Philippa Boyens)lavishes praise on her boss. "I know I shouldn't say this," she begins, "but when other directors see this movie, they're going to fucking give up."
-
...becomes all the more evident the more we hear positive things about the film. As the premiere approaches and good word of mouth begins to circulate, the haters grow increasingly virulent, irrelevant and rabid in their arguments. They'll even complain publically about their weak bladder control in an effort to slam Jackson and KK rather than entertain the notion that the film might be entertaining. "Waaah, I'll have to pee! Waaaah, nobody will sit through a 3-hour film! Jackson, you hack!" One word, you incontinent Mountain Dew-sucking bitches: Titanic.
-
Nov 27, 2005 3:03:53 PM CST
"some guy's head being digested into white goo by a giant sl
by docpazuzu
Cool.
-
by bringing up the Frodo-Sam scene on Mt Doom. fact is, that scene had tons of heart, and so obviously Jackson has proven he can handle genuine emotion in a scene already, so whats to question? Jackson may have said he was not as sure of himself in handling a scene like that as he is with action/visual stuff, but in the end he pulled it off. and so what if his wife and Boyens helped, they are working on KK too, so there is no reason to think the same kind of emotion and heart that was in LOTR won't also be in KK.
-
thats just how they are built. whats next, his fur isn't the right shade of brown? you know, anyone with the motivation can find something to criticize in anything.
-
I heard in this one, Kong is gay, and when he finds out that Ann Darrow is a chick, he flips out, and rips her head off. He then proceeds to poke his finger into her neck cavity for ONE HOUR. Thats the word on the street anyway.
-
I know someone beat me to it, but just wanted to chime in on the repitition, it has nothing to do with how "in shape" a gorilla is, they're never gonna have a six pack. They have big bellies cause they have big intestines, cause they need a more rigorous digestive system.
-
Nov 27, 2005 4:03:44 PM CST
All Ringbearer criticisms are discredited in advance by the fact
by fluffyunbound
...that Ringbearer by his own admission would have preferred that the LOTR films be cartoony, filmed in "happy happy joy joy" primary colors, and peopled by actors who never looked tired or dirty or hurt. It's hard to take his word about Kong, or any other film, seriously.
-
However, I did just the other day watch STAR WARS: REVENGE of the SITH and I have to say it was almost unwatchable. It was friggin horrible, with some of the worst acting and dialoge I have ever witnessed. I had a freind watching who is has zero opinion on this sort of geek stuff and he remarked without any prompting on anyones part on how bad the dialoge was. "This sounds like a bad soap opera' were his comments. PS-I am certain that 99.9999% of the negative posts about Peter Jackson are from geeks that are jealous that he has knocked Lucas off the pedastal and made vastly superior films to the entire Star Wars trilogy combined. BTW-the first 3 star wars are good films and I enjoyed them all very much.
-
What the FUCK, man?!?
-
on nbc. merry movie fest. watch it. oh, yeah.
-
Nov 27, 2005 4:39:54 PM CST
Then again, there is this one part where a guy gets his head bit
by slappy jones
"Well," says Jackson, "he doesn't so much get it bitten off. It's more like his head gets swallowed and digested by acidic juices and it slowly dissolves into a sort of creamy pulp."....
come on...this sounds fucking awesome.....
and for anyone doubting if this guy liked the film...
...."he proved once again that he might be the only guy whose films are worth getting on a plane and flying halfway around the planet to see. If the 44-year-old Kiwi felt any pressure over following up "The Lord of the Rings," you won't find a hint of it on screen. Some critics will complain that the film's length is an act of Oscar-drunk hubris, but while "Kong" may be indulgent, it's not pretentious. And it's certainly never dull. Jackson has honored his favorite film in the best possible way: by recapturing its heart-pounding, escapist glee."
sounds like a good review to me....
-
middle ground my ass, you little fraud. if that was true you'd take a shot at the haters as well, but you only seem to have a problem with those who are looking forward to the movie. oh yeah, thats because you are one of the troll haters. so what if i expect this to be a good, fun flick. does that somehow threaten your obviously fragile psyche? how is it any skin off your green teeth? or did you just want to add to the world's number of random acts of prickishness? get over yourself boy; while you are experiencing angry goat-love, those of us without your obvious lack of joy for life and cinema will be having fun at the theatre. aaaww, and won't that make you sooo mad?
-
No matter what reviews I read, I know that it will be good in my eyes. Thank goodness I don't have to worry about that, because there won't be a bad review. The most negative thing out of that was the corny part, which probably won't bother me as much, I don't mind corny. Bring it on KONG!
-
How in the world are they going to tak on 80 extra minutes to this film? Don't get me wrong this movie will rock, but that running length is a little much. Here's to hoping someone does a quality re-make of the original Godzilla!
-
Nov 27, 2005 4:59:45 PM CST
This just in: AICN Talkbackers upset at 3 hr. run time because t
by monkeybrains
Idiots. Yes, you will have to deal with the humiliation of having to bring your mommie along to hold your hand to take you to the bathroom half way through the movie. "Oh poor me. My mind can't grasp having to sit down for 3 hours. Oh boo hoo hoo. I don't think I can stay quite for that long. Oh Boo hoo hoo. Look at me, I'm going to be cool because I'm a troll and piss everyone off". It's not working, children. No one is swayed by your stupidity
-
That is, if'n your serious about renaming the site.
-
Nov 27, 2005 5:29:11 PM CST
Haven't got time to read the whole talkback at this exact mo
by seppukudkurosawa
but a few comments: Goatzinger, Drooling sychophantic fan-boy are four words not one...but they are four very beautiful words, each of them a beloved cornerstone behind AICN, take one away and you'll just have ICN or ACN or some such shit.---- Vern, one of the reasons why that guy said this review was a waste of his time was because it was a pretty weak review by any standards (as in the standard set by a Vern Review for example). Agree or not, but I'm waiting for the obligatory Drooling sychophantic fan-boy review, because at least they know what we're looking for in this beast. I get your point though, it is fucking annoying how people are so busy jittering about (gotta love the word jittering, huh?) that they can't actually read through the thing. Do these very same people wake up in the morning and complain about the ambling pacing of Friends, wish the milk would pour faster into their Cheerios and then drive to work on the pavement so as to save them the hassle of negotiating all those female drivers on the road? The answer to this question is yes of course. And finally, Spazuzu made a good point, what is it with this bladder obsession here? You can't hold it in for three hours? Watch the fucking film and relax, and if you piss yourself so fucking what...you'll just have to endure a bit of discomfiture on the way home, and your wife will probably be so sickened by your urine-doused hobosity that she'll leave you, but at least you got to think about something other than your own schatological urges for once.
-
Nov 27, 2005 6:07:23 PM CST
"And I don't really know. We've been asking that ourselv
by cerebralassassin
Quote of the year. A filmmaker who's let his film completely get away from him. A director who's lost complete control over his product. He can't even explain the structure of his film...he's gone insane.
-
is when will the Hobbit go into production. Some news on that would be really COOL. (I am probably not alone in wondering that.)
-
This is really pissing me off. It's a non-issue that's been turned into an issue by the press, which likes controversy, and by a vocal minority of fanboys who like to bitch. How do you guys know that 3 hours is too long? Have you been to a double secret screening of this movie? They told a story and it ended up taking 3 hours to tell, is all I know. Whether or not that story is any good remains to be seen. I'm sure someone's gonna say "the original was 100 minutes" like that has anything to do with anything. Bottom line: if you are actually so terribly busy and/or important that you can't be bothered to watch a 3 hour movie? Don't. The way you guys tell it, it's going to suck anyway.
-
"Uh guys, what the hell are we doing?" (blank stares) The way I figure it, it can go one of two ways. Kong falls off the building at the two hour mark, it takes 20 minutes for him to die and 40 minutes for the epsilogue. OR, the movie will end with him climbing the building and then later someone will mention that he died, his actual death to be saved for the SE.
-
The starlet has her choice, and sleeps with the WRITER! How cool is that? And as far as a three hour running time, just one word: Depends.
-
George Lucas has been bashed nonstop by Peter Jackson fans ever since Peter Jackson's sucess with LOTR. Now that there is a little backlash against Jackson, those same people, like Pevin and uberman are crying about it. Talk about hyopocrits! Taste your own medicine.
-
Really. It'll be great.
-
The game sucks though, Its just a Turok clone so far. Thank the Lord I bought Half Life 2 at the same time.
-
Sure, but George Lucas makes shitty movies and deserves to be criticized.
-
...the lucas bashing started around 1999 when he released the biggest disappointment of all time....
-
For the record, I love Peter Jackson as a Filmmaker. I just get sick of people bashing Lucas constantly. Yes he made a lot of mistakes with the Prequels, but they are still good movies, and Lucas doesn't deserve the disrespect he gets. I am one of those movie fans that respects and loves Peter Jackson's, as well as others Directors movies. I am really looking forward to King Kong. There is nothing wrong with a 3 hour Kong movie. In fact I am glad Kong is 3 hours, because that means more bang for the buck.
-
What's the big deal?
-
Nov 27, 2005 6:55:21 PM CST
The 3 hour run-time will most likely be a non-issue, but I say t
by ted striker
I think PJ knows how to balance a movie, even action/fantasy movies, not just dramas. It is much more difficult to make an action flick that is over 2 hours in length, without wearing out the audience. It depends on how slow you start the film, character development, how soon the action begins, rest-time between action sequences, the writing, etc. Considering PJ has 3 great action movies under his belt that ran substantiall longer than 2 hours, I'll give the benefit of the doubt. However, that doesn't mean it won't work. Regardless, everyone is going to go see this, even if it was only 15 minutes long.
-
fact is, most of the criticism of Lucas was brought down in response to the unprovoked hating on LOTR by the Lucas fanboys who couldn't stand seeing someone beside their idol being lauded and having success for making a fantasy trilogy. i'm still waiting for one of them to explain away Lucas, after garnering the vast wealth and power from the first 3 Star Wars movies, making Howard the Duck. i mean, think about it. Lucas had the ability to do whatever he wanted, the cinematic world was his oyster....and he chose to make a movie about a spaceduck. what is his next project? is he doing anything that doesn't involve milking Star Wars? oh yeah, that Indiana Jones thing, which is simply more milking.
-
Who do I agree with? In the words of Number 2, "that would be telling", but the fact is I completely and 100% agree.
-
"I HATE EVERY CHIMP I SEE... FROM CHIMPAN-A TO CHIMPANZEE... NO YOU'LL NEEEEEVEEERRR MAKE A MONKEEEEY OUT OF MEEEEEEE!!!!"
-
Nov 27, 2005 7:29:51 PM CST
But Ringbearer, I can see everything in each of the Kong trailer
by fluffyunbound
Everything. What didn't you see? The MOST negative thing one can say in terms of the visuals on the special effects in LOTR is that the Balin's Tomb sequence is choppily cut in the theatrical version [a failing which disappears almost entirely in the Extended Edition]. And when you see the Kong trailer in a theatre, you can count individual strands of Kong's fur, if you so desire. What's being hidden? // In terms of where the additional running time is coming from - I can't be the only person who found the concluding New York sequences in the original to be a little undeveloped, relative to the rest of the film. It's got the iconic Kong on the Empire State Building shot, sure - but still. It's a big city, Kong could certainly productively and entertainingly smash more of it. So a lot of the extra time could be in New York. If you look at the entire course of the original and try to imagine where the additional time might go, I think you could easily bulk up the "Voyage to Skull Island" parts with about ten more minutes of content, add thirty minutes to events on the island, and add forty minutes to the climax in New York [devoting one third of the additional time to character interaction and the rest to set pieces] without the length becoming excessive.
-
George Lucas did not make Howard The Duck! He only gave some financial support to it, so he was mentioned as an Producer. That is all. Do some research before you criticize.
-
Willard Huyck Directed Howard The Duck. That's who. Check imdb for yourself.
http://www.imdb.com/title//tt0091225/ -
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0091225/
-
Kong is a genetic science experiment gone wrong and is voiced by james earl jones.
-
Nov 27, 2005 8:01:38 PM CST
for the record, i actually like 3 out of 6 of the Star Wars flic
by peven
and was a Star Wars fan before most of you were a gleam in your daddy's eye. how many here can say they waited all afternoon in line to see ROTJ on opening day? excuse the fuck out of me if i ended up walking out feeling let down thanks to the muppet ewoks and ending that made Barney the dinasaur seem dark and edgy. its just a shame that the first two prequels were not as good as Sith. went to see the re-releases of the Star Wars and ESB in the theatre too even. if Jackson makes the Hobbit and it is as lame as Phantom Menace or ATOC i'll have no problem in saying so either.
-
just because the monkey is big doesnt mean he can act.
-
Maybe it was the sputtering that obscured the message, but I addressed both points in my post, you jackass.
-
...so how ridiculous does that make you mack?? fucking dweeb.
-
not really. A three hour Kong movie is self indulgent. What's wrong with a tight 2 hour film with an hour of deleted scenes? PJ has become Kevin Smith, but without anyone to say no to him.
-
That preview was corny. I think I just lost complete interest.
-
i think as a few talkbackers have said previously, the 3 hour thing can be both negetive and positive. if the film is great, 3 hours is awesome, if it isnt so good the running length just adds fuel to the fire. the main concern is that the original is just over half as long, with harry potter theyre dealing with a book, an especially long book, so 3 hours is probably what was expected from it. uve just gotta hope that extra 80 minutes is somthing of substance and relevance that the audience needs to and will be pleased to have seen. im really sorry for adding star wars to this rant but if kong takes any oscars (in the technical dept of the film-making process) of ep. 3 ill be so disapointed, especially for ILM and john williams who really pulled out all the stops on ep.3 to deliver their best performances to date, i know thats a big call on williams, but his ep.3 score was brilliant. it was complete, compelling, totally in sync with all that was visual, it complemented the film brilliantly. i understand it is very early days, but anything ive heard from kong has been fairly so-so. heres to hoping its good, and that 3 hours aint an issue.
-
Nov 27, 2005 8:21:32 PM CST
Opening weekend - 80 million and then it will severely taper off
by the_pissboy1
Why? What's gonna draw families or women to this film? It's about a big fucking ape...that's it folks. A big goddamn ape with a thing for blondes? WTF would an ape want with a stupid tiny human? Masturbating his giant kong would be more interesting to an ape than spending time with a tiny human. Do fanboys really think women/moms/teen girls are waiting around to watch a film about a primitive monster tormenting a woman? They can just watch Streetcar Named Desire and get that story, plus some acting, not lousy CGI.
-
thanks for filling us in....
-
I don't care what anybody says: the original Kong is of interest only for the effects. The movie itself is rubbish. The '76 Kong is okay as it didn't take itself too seriously, had three good central performances...kind of a fun movie. The idea of spending three hours on "big ape likes girl, big ape gets shot by biplanes" is absurd...but then I found the last ten hours of Jackson's moviemaking boring beyond belief.
-
MOVE! Move it now! It may not be too late! I think a porfessional can restore the colors with some sort of lemon juice treatment if the damage has already been done. It might be worth less on the open market, but I doubt you're going to try to sell it anyway.
-
tell me something. i am not trying to be a dickhead or get into a silly messageboard fight with you although i am sure that is about to happen but if you thought all of the LOTR films were boring how come...well...let me put it this way...if you saw fellowship and it was "boring beyond belief" why did you go and see two towers? o.k so maybe you thought you would give it a chance and see if it was better than fellowship but then you see it and you think that that too is "boring beyond belief" so why on earth would you go and see the third three hour film of a series which so far you had found to be boring "beyond all belief"?
i don't get it.....people who say "all three LOTR films were boring"
why the fuck would you watch all three of them then? it doesn't make sense to me.....you pretty much know what you are going to get after the first 3 hours.......they were all made at the same time..by the same people.....what on earth would compel you to watch all of them?
and then there are people like ringbearer9 who hates these films so much not only has he/she seen them all at the cinema he/she can directly quote the fucking directors commentary??!!??
guys there are so many other things you could be doing with your lives other than dedicating over nine hours to films you hate or in ringbearers case over fucking 20 hours watching films you know you will hate....he/she can quote the commentaries for god sake...doesn't that strike anyone else to be a little fucking deranged? -
they were not filmed back to back all at once....
they were filmed seperately and therefore could possibly lead to better films...for example jar jar binlks being swept under the carpet after the hatred of his character swept the world. that was a direct result of lucas actually listening to his fans. because if anyone thinks jar jar wasn't meant to be main player through the perquels they are crazy. of course he was. if he had been a smash and the fans had loved him he would have been there up front the whole way...
plus it is star wars...there were already three awesome films to begin with so you just knew he had it in him to make a great film again...which he did with SITH which was great. I knew he would eventually make a great star wars film. plus what star wars fan wasn't going to go and see the return of vader?
i know plenty of people who hated TPM and didn't bother seeing the other 2.....
but LOTR was made by the same director..with the same crew...with the same cast at the same time. the prequels were spread out and they did get better. TPM was a disappointment. there were flashes of greatness in there....so i thought maybe he will get it right with AOTC. but AOTC is the worst movie of all star wars films..i would take caravan of courage over that fucking film any day...but then he promises us a darker story more in line with empire strikes back featuring the return of darth vader. hard to resist.
jackson promised three hours of the same "boring" stuff you guys hated in the first two.
you really can't compare the two at all.
plus the only "big budget" hollywood film jackson had made before was the frighteners which most of you rip on as well .. he didn't exactly have the history of three of the best films of all time behind him...lucas did....not to mention his involvment of being one of th guys behind the indiana jones films too.... -
they would have saved on some cgi. He probably wouldn't have even needed a hairsuit. and the face is perfect. Ook for us Nic! Wave those hands around! Knuckle Walk. This part would fall right in to nic's acting range.
-
can you please let me know the purpose of dredging up that article....do you have s file of things you store away..are you the killer from seven??
why are you so obsessed with jackson and his work?
that article is ancient.....you memorise commentaries....you continually post on anything related to kong or jackson....
please.....why?
what drives you to do all this. there has to be something else going on in your life...surely?
-
You use the pretext of my failing to address a specific concern that certain naysayers have aired about Kong's running time (when, in fact, I have) as an excuse to call me a "sputtering dolt," and when I point out a mistake on your part, you stick to your guns and pretend that circumstances haven't changed. Maybe if I disguised my agression in flippant semantics like you do then I wouldn't seem so "surly," but I'm not interested, and you're still a jackass. Now I don't really know you and I don't know what the hell I've done to get your attention, but if you've got some problem with me that compelled you to keep bothering me after a mini-argument I consider settled, then I really wish you'd drop the bad Kevin Smith impersonation and actually talk to me straight; we chimps, we're not so good with abstract concepts, after all, and we zoo-bound chimps have a world view limited to what we can see from inside our cages. Then again, that would rob you of the opportunity to try out all of your ornate insults on me.
-
Fanboys will never get their head out of the clouds and realize Hollywood is still and always will be a business for making profit. A three hour plus film is a big risk for a studio and theater franchise. From a multiplex theater business point of view they will make less profit from a 3hr running time film versus a 90min pixar film. Why? Because with a 90min film you can schedule more showtimes in a day than you can with a 3hr epic, hence more profit within a day. Theater owners dread getting another 3hr "Meet Joe Black" because if they bomb, your stuck making no profit and wasting scheduling space. At least with a shorter film that shows more often during a day, but bombs, you can make ends somewhat meet. Anything can be made into a 3hr golden turd, it's just you need to make sure that turd keeps your attention well throughout. The real craft comes from taking something 3hrs and making it still seem brilliant in 90mins. Save your epic bullshit for your directors cut, extended or special edition dvds. If I wanted to spend the day watching a movie in a theater I'd goto Butt-Numb-a-thon. :)
-
Somebody should remind this to Jackson if he wants to update the film. Yes, Kong was an allegory for the white man who comes and captures Kong, sends him by ship back to the US in chains, where kong breaks free and when he goes after the white woman he is murdered.
If Jackson wants to really do a modern interpretation of Kong, he is recruited by an NBA coach and given a lucrative contract, becomes a media celebrity, marries a gorgeous white woman, makes some commercials, records rap album as MC Kong, however his success leads to him becoming a coke addict and kills his wife after they divorce by stabbing her, however he is acquited by an ignorant jury of fellow apes spends the rest of his days in Malibu playing golf with Godzilla.
-
Nov 27, 2005 10:30:59 PM CST
Kong will NOT be eclipse Titanic, let alone be the #1 movie of t
by acroyear77
...reality check!
It'll be a modest success, with a relatively strong openening (it WON'T break any records), but'll fizzle in the second week.
-
Most of the bigger movies in recent years have been over two hours. A half hour more or less isn't going to significantly affect the numbers, especially given the number of screens they show a big film at nowadays.
-
distributors fight for how many theaters they get shown in. You get your film placed in 5 theaters, an extra half hour in a film may mean that that they can only show your film 5 instead of 6 times. That equates to a 17% revenue difference. To make up for that you have to be put in 6 theaters. However with so many other competing films, a theater may opt to put in something that is 1/2 the length, can be shown 8 times for the same amount of money and get nearly the same number of seats filled.
-
That's an insane amount of money to make a movie. Add another $100 million+ in marketing.
-
I'm still getting over this one. Really, this isn't hyperboyle. This just blew my MIND when I saw that lil factoid. Like hell I can get my family to watch it now.
-
While the first LOTR is good, Jackson is at his best when his own imagination is overloading as in the Frighteners or Dead Alive, when the entire reality of the worlds he creates threaten to fall apart under the pressure. ROTK seems to be lacking that creative spark and seems more an example of how tired and withdrawn a director can get trying to do 3 movies without a break. Lets hope he can bring that manic fire to Kong, and he doesn't just deliver a generic, good-looking epic that bores the world into submission like ROTK or Titanic did.
-
..because it will be in 4500 theaters on 15000 screens. lol. I say 150 mil is possible. But the second weekend will be 60-80...which doesn't suck I suppose.
-
I'm getting more movie for the same price I'd pay for an hour and a half. Hell, the $10 dollar nacho and drink combo seems like a reasonable purchase in this scenario. I'd still be out 2 dollars, but I can live with that.
-
http://www.mininova.org/tor/163952
-
Gorgeous!
-
Kong looks great. Certainly a bit of Sky Captain look to Skull Island, with all the fake sets (I know a lot of miniatures were involved instead of just virtual stuff, but it still creates the same effect once live actors are composited in). Jackson said that part of making the movie longer was about developing more of the Ann/Kong relationship on the island. In general, I think sensitive conversations with giant monsters is a tricky business, still I'm hoping Jackson pulls it off. It was hard to tell from tonight's footage if he can or not, though.
-
Let's not forget the "primitive" Zulus did kick the crap out the British imperialists when they first tried to destroy the Zulus. Maybe the Zulus didn't have guns but they sure did hold a higher level of morality than the British slimeballs who came to imprison them, burn their lands, and exploit their wealth. Just a little FYI reminder ;)
-
absolutely NO news in it. Nothing we dont know. It's a puff piece, and then this site links to the piece as if it's earth shattering. I wanna love the movie, but come on. A little honest judgement about what is and is not worth a headline, please. www.unseenfilms.com
-
So suck on that! BWAHAHAHA www.unseenfilms.com
-
http://www.mininova.org/tor/163952
very emotional, very dramatic footage. I think the people exspecting overt sexual beastiality between Kong and Ann will be dissapointed, but I think audiences and critics, and children will love it. You really get the sense of Kong being Master of his Domain, but very very lonely.
The cinematography was outstanding. The CGI was shaky in a few parts, but who knows what the completed completed stuff will be like. -
but it is not going to bomb...... i have a feeling once people see this film and word of mouth gets out it is gonna be huge....i really think we are about to see a truly great film. so it is three hours long? haters seem to clutch to that fact like no three hour film can be successful. i tell you one thing..well loved novels or not king kong has more mass appeal than a series of films about what is generally considered to be d and d nerd type horseshit and LOTR didn't do to badly now did it?
oh and i too fucking love howard the duck...i don't know why it gets such a bum rap....it's a talking duck and he bangs lea thompson...what is not to like?
anyway, i guess we will all know in two weeks whether the film is good or not.
except for ringbearer9, indiana clones etc etc i mean they won;t be seeing it will they?
of course they fucking will...see ya opening night.... -
LOTR were book translations and King Kong is a remake of a movie that already has a remake, so when actually comes up with his own ideas and pushes them around Hollywood, I'll be impressed. I'm seeing Kong but I'm not sure if it will do as well as many of expect it to. I saw the trailer one or two weeks ago in a packed theater and people were laughing at it. Mind you younger generations probably think this is a rip off of Mighty Joe Young and just ignore it, not connecting to the original film.
-
do THE HOUND OF THE BASKERVILLES & REBEL WITHOUT A CAUSE have to do with KING KONG?
-
Man, there's nothing like a Jackson/Lucas-themed talkback to bring out the most odious of drooltards. You hatecocks really can't be told to fuck off enough times. My new favorites are the ones who talk about the running time of the film as if it actually means something in terms of revenue if the film strikes a chord with audiences. You could make the same argument about Titanic. Yes, if Titanic were a lean 100 minutes it could have been shown more often and increased the ticket sales by a wide margin, but who's to say Titanic would have been as successful if it hadn't been three hours long? Besides, how much more money did Titanic need to make in order to prove itself to almighty Mammon? Maybe it's length was an integral part of the story's appeal; did that ever occur to you? Of course it did -- you're just trying to impress people with your knowledge of how soulless box office economics tend to work. Where does it all end? Hell, why not make one-hour McMovies that even the most ADD-afflicted viewer can see without suffering a breakdown? Think of all the money one-hour movies could make if they're a hit. Why, you could almost double the amounts of showings in any given day! Ka-ching! At times I find it virtually impossible to believe that some of you assholes are movie fans on even the most rudimentary of levels. If you want to impress people with your home theater system, you're better off getting one of those effects-laden, show-offy calibration discs because your love for actual movies is obviously next to infinitesmal.
-
The reason people are scared about this films length, aside from numbum syndrome and 'I can't hold this fart in Any longer....' (fffffffffffrrrrrrrr) [crowd all react] "oooooow" "Take it out side man" "This movie stinks!" **** People fear a 3 hour film because we've all been to 3 hour films. And RARELY do they zip by. Titanic masterfully filled every frame with something. But it had something going for it. Tits for one thing... and lots of screaming dying people on a sinking building sized ship - with monstrously good special effects. But having said that, look at it now. 3 hours of an annoying 'top 10' flute motif playing in the back ground. 'Lawrence of Arabia' I adore this film. But IT'S SO BLOODY LONG! Argh!! Dert scene. More desert scene. walking through the desert. 'opps, i just tuned out, what happened in thnose last couple scenes.' 'Dances with Wolves' pulled off the 3 hour film very nicely. But it gave Costner the idea that he should make every film 3 hours - thus his downfall. 'The Postman' yeah you know what I'm talking about. 'Lord of the rings' (here we go again) People keep saying that the films were cut down from the books to much as is. Ok, so now we have these cut down screenplays that follow the books. This is MY ISSUE now. The screenplays are now half arsed. So what they should have done, IMO? Concetrate on each screenplay and re-draft each one into a nice tight 120 pages. THATS what adaption is all about. I fully understand people love the books, and like the EE films just fine. But they are 'in the moment' films. 10 - 20 years from now I'm keen to see if ANYONE (bar the hardest of hardcore) will truely be bothered to take them all in. On a side note: theres talkbackers who keeps saying they just watched Episode 3 and it is 'unwatchable'. What exactly is unweatchable?? The space battle at the begining? yeah, I know what you mean. The crashing ship? what were they thinking? Palpatine seducing Anikin. ow Stop, my eyes! The appearance of the Emperor.... the battle between Obie-wan and Anikin, Sidious and Yoda in the senate. It truely was excrutiating wasn't it!! I'm fully with you guys. This film is **UNWATCHABLE** I might go watch it again for the 10th time, just to make sure. Oh and what I said about LotR. I hold the same view over Harry Potter too. Ok, there's 2 kinds of 3 hour films. BAD and boring ones. GOOD but hard to revisit multiple times ones. King Kong is going to be one or the other.
-
Is this Harry guy for real? His love of primitive cultures? Are you having a lend mate? What bizarre sort of racist society do you live in you reactionary prick? Or are you simply trying to devise more reasons to spruik what is shaping as the most bloated, useless waste of celluloid this year.
What a clown. -
Not that it matters, The Lion is about to start making his movie which will eclipse every other movie ever made...
-
I dont mean to shit on the big guy, okay maybe I do a little, the bugger, but the very idea of Kong is impossible due to our little friend the Square Root Law of physics fame. You see, take an average gorilla (no, not the funny guys in berrets with fixed bayonets chopping off people's appendages in the jungle), no the anthropoid ape, that slightly resembles a human in form. Say you double the length of it's arms and legs (which is square) the area of the gorilla's arms and legs is now increased by a degree of four. Also, as a consequence of this, the volume and weight of the gorilla's body has increased by 8 or cubed. In effect, this would crush the poor animal under his own weight. Plus, Kong's head is slightly proportional to his body, an incongruity with nature, as the larger the body of an animal, the smaller it's cranium or head is in relation to it's body. This is for convervation of energy and ties into the circulatory and other networks within the creature, so as no to over tax the system. Therefore, King Kong is a physical impossibility and cannot exist. Think about it, in order for a gorilla of his size (guesstimating about 1,000 percent larger than a silverback) his endoskeleton and internal organs would not be able to support his massive structure, and he definitely couldn't swing from cliff edge to cliff edge or across skyscrapers 80 stories off the ground. Might as well have the on screen Kong throw giant wooden barrels at a massively enlarged plumber in downtown NY; it would be just as believable. Yeah, Im a genius too, PJ.........Science!
-
Ignore those party poopers. True geeks are pumped for this film. Don't hold back.
-
George Lucas was being bashed way before 1999, in fact the bashing started right after Jedi's release. Here are some of the bashing highlights along the way...
1) RETURN OF THE JEDI - Bashed due to death of Boba Fett, Ewoks, bad acting...hello Harrison Ford, and generally not being a patch on Empire.
2) Not making any more Star Wars movies immediately after Jedi.
3) The Ewok TV movies/cartoons/Droids TV show.
4) Howard the Duck...
5) Labyrinth...
6) Willow...sure it's fun but when are you going to make more Star Wars?
5) Young Indiana Jones...bashed, bashed, bashed.
6) Radioland Murders...ouch.
7) The Special Editions, where the bashng reached a national level, truly the start of the Holy War.
8) The prequels...
9) The original version DVD debacle...
So to say that Lucas bashing started with The Phantom Menace is simply wrong. And I haven't even mentioned the Holiday Special... -
I remember the same argument about Godzilla. taking into consideration the proprotions and natural logistics, his bones would have to be the strength of titanium. Proportionately. And his skin would need an elastisity that goes beyond the realms of science. To not would have his skin ripping and falling off on the first building corner. I wish Kong was more of a monster than a big ape :(
-
This movie will be pretty good, due to the fact that Peter Jackson is too much of a grade A movie geek to make a fuck up of something like King Kong. Plus i've hardly seen any footage of the film so will be nice to walk into a movie theatre and see a new film as opposed to one ive seen just about every frame of on the internet. Will also be interesting to see how Jackson copes without Tolkien as all the moments I loved in the Lord of the Rings films were due to Tolkien rather than Jackson. Having said that the Mines of Moria sequence in Fellowship was just about the greatest thing ever put onto movie screens and Heavenly Creatures is a masterpiece. I can't wait to see his version of The Lovely Bones too. In the meantime King Kong ahould do just fine.
-
Seeing that Harry Potter has already pulled in $200 million gives me hope that this film, opening weekend, will pull in at least $100 million, though I think that it's length could work against it.
Though I get the feeling that Universal will play up the romance angle, so that it brings in more of the 'Titanic' crowd. -
To put it straight (as if anyone listens) the Lucas hating was not as a result of SW fans attacking LOTR way back when anybody gave a damn, rather the other way round. It was the natural progression for all the Matrix fanatics that balled out Phantom Menace and then realised it was actually THEIR trilogy that failed miserably ('their'!) If you ever visited forums for these respective series, it was LOTR that were full of anti SW postings. Cry all you want, it's a fact. Same with these TB's, always an anti Lucas rant whenever Jackson is mentioned. As for walking out of ROTJ in disgust... if that's the case, you were too old back THEN to go see it, what the fuck are you complaining about 20 years later? What was this TB about anyway... oh yeah, Kong. The lure of a big monkey smashing things is too strong, I'm looking forward to it, though I've yet to enjoy any film by PJ so far. But it's a giant monkey. And Jack Black's in it.
-
Nov 28, 2005 6:01:53 AM CST
"Zulu spears, Amazonian Arrows, a dagger from Borneo... then you
by salvatoregravano
...them over and see 'Made in China'".
-
Nov 28, 2005 6:14:01 AM CST
You can pull all the number out of your ass as you want. The fil
by citizen arcane
I've heard that argument too many times and it's always proven wrong. People who want to see it are going to see it. At the very most they'll spend some extra bread to get it in a few more theaters but we're in government spending territory with this film's budget as it is so it hardly matters. As for the film itself, I'm reserving jedgment until I see it because I know they can literally work on the FX until the studio pries it out of their hands but damned if it doesn't look cartoony. They can be as snobby about declaring that the village is a model if they like but it looks CGI to me because everything around it is CGI. Once you white wash everything in digital resolution, the whole thing might as well be animated. And the Frighteners, whee did this revisionist shit come from? It was pretty unanomous that The Frighteners was a piece of shit. What? Peter Jackson directed it? Well then it kicked ass. As for Dead Alive, while it does have the distnction of being the goriest film ever made and it's a lot of fun to watch whilst high, let's be honest here people.I for one hope there's a little Dead Alive in this film though. Jacksons obviously been playing this in his head with his dick in his hand since he was a kid, there must be some juvinile splatter porn in there somewhere.
-
I've never understood the widespread propensity for accusing TBers of seeing a film they know they are going to dislike. You'd have to pay *me* to see Kong or the LOTR sequels (i was loaned FOTR).
-
Nov 28, 2005 6:34:15 AM CST
PJ did NOT have the freedom to make it 3 hours. His contract sa
by minderbinder
He only got permission to make it longer when he showed them a rough cut and they signed off on a longer cut.
-
Nov 28, 2005 6:38:41 AM CST
Anyone think that the '33 Kong looks like the abominable sno
by droids22
The people that complain that the CGI in this
new Kong looks fake should take a look at the
Kong of '33! And even the one from '76. This
is definitely the Kong I've been waiting to see. I remember people complaining about the length of Titanic but like after the DVD came out they were all looking for the 4 hour version. ;-> -
Nov 28, 2005 7:09:31 AM CST
RE:"You'd have to pay *me* to see Kong or the LOTR sequels (
by citizen arcane
And yet you waste time posting on a messageboard on a film you won't see just to explain to anyone who will listen that you're no going to see the movie. Ok. As for Titanic, I wasn't waiting for the 4 hour version. I was waiting for the version that shot a laser beam from the screen that would mercifully kill me if I had to sit through that dreck again. But I know, I'm in the minority on that one.
-
Nov 28, 2005 7:27:27 AM CST
"I've never understood the widespread propensity for accusin
by docpazuzu
It's because most haters, like you Mr. Clones, are phonies. The screaming and masturbitching is just a way to throw some internet weight around, nebulous though it may be to everyone but themselves. Haters in fact harbor a secret geeky love for the very films and directors they claim to loathe. They simply suffer periodic spells of anguish and rage as a result of once again realizing how small and lifeless their genitals are while taking a shower and must therefore stride forth and punish the world of filmmaking for this slight dealt to them by nature. Lucas and Jackson, being fundamentally geeks who have actually made headway in the real world, are the perfect target for their foam-flecked fury. This is why haters, as a rule, smell so pungently. Tiny genitalia + avoided showers = malodorous internet rageoholics.
-
I bear no malice against Jackson. I've said many times that he is a pleasant, hardworking, infectiously enthusiastic guy, whose films just happen to majorly suck. All me and my fellow detractors are doing is adding a much needed counterpoint to the outrageous Jackson fawning and creepy mutual backslapping. Oh, and Titanic was fantastic.
-
Nov 28, 2005 7:45:54 AM CST
"a much needed counterpoint to the outrageous Jackson fawning"
by docpazuzu
Would your assertion that LOTR has a "communist subtext" be a part of that counterpoint-making?
-
Tolkien needs taking down a notch too.
-
Shower day, Mr. Clones?
-
I take hygiene very seriously. And i have a nice big cock.
-
I'm sure Ringbearer9 tells you that all the time.
-
As long as it's not people drinking vomit or eating shit
-
Kong will own.
-
Nov 28, 2005 8:05:31 AM CST
"Seriously, guys- Coke Zero (TM) is really pretty good"
by bendersshinyass
How bout 'No!!' I have no beef with Sugar. I love sugar. I flog sugar cane and chew on it when I'm driving through the mountains. Sugar is awesome! jelly beans. caramel late. chocholate fucking cake!! SUGAR. Yum. better than that crumbled up super sweet shit they put in it's place. bla! I read a conspiracy theory that said it was toxic.
-
Nov 28, 2005 8:08:38 AM CST
Benderass, the opening battle sequence in Episode III is, in fac
by fluffyunbound
It is easily the worst, most uninvolving battle in any of the six films. I'd rather watch the Ewoks fight the Storm Troopers 100 times than watch that battle. First rule of film battles: it has to be at least theoretically possible for the audience to pick up visual cues concerning who is on what side and who is winning or losing at any particular moment in time for the scenes to work. Put a lot of pointless and unexplained shit on the screen, and I will yawn - ESPECIALLY when the intercuts are mainly shots of Hayden delivering his lines unconvincingly. // What everyone leaves out of their discussion of movie lengths is that it's not time that's the issue. It's your willingness as a viewer to give the story that time. For example, I have little to no problem with the length of the LOTR films, because they are crammed with incident, and each incident bridges the time to the next incident, so I get through 3+ hours without much of an issue. A much shorter film like TPM, however, loses me so utterly in the first forty minutes that I am too annoyed with the film to buy into it at any point. Three hours of a good film is more tolerable than 90 minutes of a film from which you have withdrawn your charity.
-
Nov 28, 2005 8:16:32 AM CST
"Benderass, the opening battle sequence in Episode III is, in fa
by bendersshinyass
Are you serious! Man those buzz droids and their little noices just keeps bringing me back. So do the guns. So do the sound effect. I'm keen on the wide open space battle over a planet scope too. Ewan McGreggor was a champion. and when they got on that ship and jumped out with their Lazer Swords, with a back drop of the battle taking place. Well... You're not a true star wars fan so why do I care what you think?? I'll watch the ewoks battle straight after it, because it intercuts with the emperor, vador and luke. And strangle that scene NEVER did anything for me before Sith came along. Besides, I've never been lost ina star wars film. they're not that hard to follow, man. But evidently they are when people really think Vador in the PT is different from Vador in the OT. This LOTR incidence which lead to incidence moments, yeah sure your right.... but some of those incidences are pretty dull and coule be merged with other Incidences - not to mention the incessive cutting back and forward. Star wars does this, but not for over an hour and a half on one scene.
-
I love the Jackson camp talking about how brilliant he is for "having the balls" to make a three hour movie.
Did you idiots even read WHY he made it three hours? He said he doesn't fucking know. The LOTR films could have been shorter, and or, been filled with more content from the novels if Jackson had some idea of how to pace a movie without resorting to fucking slow mo every time Frodo or Sam said something or anytime had to turn their head and speak. I'm not a Jackson hater or lover, he did a good job with LOTR visually, but I don't give him the credit others do because it wasn't his story. He connected the dots reasonably well, but he totally fucked a good portion of the story up with his meddling (Aragorn, Helm's Deep, Faramir, the Army of the Dead, etc etc.) and therefor it will never be LOTR, but his weak ass interpretation.
How the fuck do you effectively DOUBLE the original (Kong) movies run time??? Are we in for more slow-mo bullshit from Jackson and horrid pacing? Is he going to slow the film down everytime Kong looks at Anne? 3 hours indeed. I hope we get a 4 hour extended version showcasing Kong rubbing one out to Anne bathing in a river nude, or Kong trying on a tuxedo and getting a new haircut to impress Anne on their New York trip. Maybe even a cute scene where he slips and scampers like Bambi on a frozen pond in Central Park, oh wait.... -
Dude..."Lazor Swords"??? If you are going to try to make some point that the Star Wars prequels are better than The Lord of the Rings movies (which is of course preposterous), at least use the proper terminology = Light Sabers. Thank you.
-
Nov 28, 2005 9:15:31 AM CST
"Benderass, the opening battle sequence in Episode III is, in fa
by cpt kirks 2pay
I dounno about you guys, but I ma sooooooooooo pissed off that fuck all happens in that Space Battle. It's over in 5 minutes!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Is GL doing that deliberatley to piss us off??? I couldn't believe it. After all the hype and build up to this scene all this time and we get hardly anything. A few Clone Ships get blown up, Buzz droids adn that's that!!! Whenever I think about that brilliant opening pan shot I just get dismayed when I think about how it was a build up to virtually nothing. No this was supposed to be the Space Battle to end all Space Battles, beat the pants off the Jedi battle etc, especially with it's scope and the technology to make it happen. But it's probably the worst. To ignore all of that epic battle in that scene and just turn it inot background fodder and f*ck it all off!? Is GL dead or what?
-
Nov 28, 2005 9:20:16 AM CST
You know what bothers me about the "LOTR isn't Jackson's
by fluffyunbound
The fact that Jackson was the DIRECTOR of the films. And except for the cases where the director also writes the screenplay for a film, directors ALWAYS are working with someone else's story. "Goodfellas" wasn't Scorcese's "own story", either. Neither was "Raging Bull". Just about none of Lean's work was Lean's "own story". "The Godfather" was Mario Puzo's story. Etcetera, etcetera.
-
Any wonder Skull Island is sinking what with King Kong doing Kong size dumps all over the place!! They must be fucking HUGE!!!
-
Why is it that people are dragging Titanic into this discussion with regards to Kong and it's possible quality vs. box office intake?
Titanic was a piece of shit movie, that had ticket sales bolstered by legions of Leo worshiping teens going to see the film over and over and over again. Yet, for the sake of Kong you drag that film into the fray as if final dollar amount means quality of product. Can't the hypocrisy stop? The length is of issue not because people can't sit through a long film, but rather why SHOULD you if the story can be done, AS IT WAS ORIGINALLY, in a shorter time frame? So he pads Kong out to 3 hours, does that mean it's going to be "extra special" or just overly long? -
http://tinyurl.com/758u7
-
Nov 28, 2005 10:08:12 AM CST
Did they borrow the sunset sky for the finale from James Cameron
by drath
I know sunsets and sunrises can look like that (sometimes), but the pics of Kong in the Empire State building make me think of the big "I'm flying" scene in Titanic. Same colors I guess. I wish I knew why these talkback wars get so silly and so repetative. Is it the same exact people whining or baiting the whiners that were doing this back in 99 or 98? That's the first time I remember it really taking off, and by now it's like a steady stream of idiocy over every blockbuster. You can almost guess what's going to be a hit just based on how stupid/rabid/huge the talkback for it gets! Not that I'm saying anything new (even on this Talkback I bet), but good grief it never stops!
-
My greatest fear about this new Kong is that the big ape will be played too sympathetic. For 90% of the original 1933 version Kong is a terrifying force of nature. I mean when he pummels the subway car full of people, that's just... terrifying. Watching the original version I was struck by just how scary it must've been when it was first released. This new Kong I don't know... I'll make judgements after I see it, but it seems like PJ sucked out all the terror. KONG is a slightly smarter than average wild animal. NOthing more. And he's a scary motherfucker.
-
3 hours of dinosaurs and a huge gorilla kicking their scaly asses. I'm THERE. And the beauty of it is, none of the haters will be in the theater with me! I mean...why would anybody waste their time on it if they hate it? Right? Think I'm going to waste my time on Bloodrayne? Hell no. To my fellow Kong fans: Have fun! The best holiday movie is just around the corner!
-
Nov 28, 2005 10:13:05 AM CST
I'm curious to know if Kong will suffer the same fate as Jur
by k|lldozer
any of us who took kids, nephews or neices to Jurassic Park back when, realized the fatal flaw in Spielberg's once-tempting Dino-gasm: kids were bored for 35 minutes until the creatures slowly emerged onscreen. Kong's 3 hour running time has me wondering just how much character development, exposition and plot advancement needs to take place until Big Poppa appears. any guesses? i'm betting on about 45 minutes before Ann is even tied to that altar.
-
at least the boy of steel wouldn't be wearing brown speedos and a cape made out of leather seat covers. Don't get me wrong, Singer is much, much better than the train wreck "reimagined" by Tim Burton. I'm just sayin'.
-
Nov 28, 2005 10:25:48 AM CST
I've never heard anyone whine about the pacing of Jurrassic
by citizen arcane
I think the ADD/Mtv mentality is reaching critical mass. We didn't see the shark for the first hour in that Deep Blue Sea rip-off that Spielberg also made but people still liked that flick.
-
get a grip on reality dude. i'm no fan of Titanic by any means, but to dismiss the BILLION dollars that Titanic made as a result of teenage girl obsession is clueless. if teenage girls had that much money and influence on a movie's box office then Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants would have at least broken the $100 million mark by that reasoning. there were hordes of people in their 20's, 30's, 40's, etc who went to see Titanic, repeatedly. in fact, i bet it was more popular among middle-aged women as it was for teenagers. shit, my parents, who are in their 60's, get out to the movies maybe once a yr tops and they went to see it, for example. the ultimate chick-flick date/couples movie, sure, but waaaaay beyond pure teenybopper fare. now, to continue on that line of thought, if Kong's 3 hours are padded and dull, the general public won't stay with it and no matter how forgiving Kong/Jackson fans are the box office will be limited, its a simple matter of math. but if it makes big money, it can't be credited to just the geeks/fanboys either. so, as the saying goes, the proof will be in the pudding, and in a few weeks we'll know the answer.
-
I'm not necessarily talking about the adults in the theater - but since Kong will most likely go for a PG/PG13 rating, you KNOW there will be plenty of kids in the theaters with which this will be an issue. When i took my nephew to JP when he was 13, that's what i got out of him. I wouldn't chalk it up to the MTV generation either - it simply comes down to what the picture promises in trailers, and what it delivers. Will Jackson be able to hold our kids' attentions long enough? I hope. He'll have no trouble holding mine, i'm certain. Perhaps he'll begin the picture with a bang, and not a build up.
-
"Lets see those people make three previously unfilmabale books back to back and win 11 oscars." If you want to get technical, LOTR won 17 Oscars. ROTK alone won 11.
-
I think it is you who is clueless and should take a trip back in time and realize just how huge Leo was, and how much of Titanic's success was due to the worldwide cult of Leo. But hey, if you went in to see Kate Winslet's tits, that's fine, that's the only reason I went to see that pile. Does Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants have one of the biggest "teen heart throbs" in recent pop culture history? No. There's your answer.
Do you even understand how much money teens have had to toss away in the last 15 years? I guess all the fucking cellphones, video games, designer clothes aren't a big enough hint at their disposable income. You get a group of teenage girls with a massive crush on a heart throb, put him in a giant love story at the peak of his popularity, you get a HUGE percentage of the final take accounted for by their dollars. -
according to your logic all it takes is for DiCaprio to have been in a movie and it would make big money, yet aside from Titanic, your theory falls flat on its face. how much did The Beach make? Gangs of New York? Man in the Iron Mask? anywhere close to a billion fucking dolars? how about half that much? one fourth? see, your point simply does not hold up any scrutiny, plain and simple. it takes a whole lot more than some swooning teenage girls to generate a BILLION dollars. maybe your problem is math, you simply have no concept of just how much money that is.
-
and Clarke Gable was as cool as it gets, though i could never stand that wimpy Ashely Wilkes, lol.
-
Nov 28, 2005 11:47:47 AM CST
Even if the movie is shit it will still be a high grossing movie
by mr. profit
But the anticipation for this one seems to be at a crazy level. People were seriously cheering in the theater when Kong smacked the plane. I am going to see it opening day. It looks like fun. And if a mediocre crappy sappy love movie like Titanic can bank with a 3 hour run time, Kong should have no problems.
-
Nov 28, 2005 11:52:05 AM CST
And wasn't Spiderman 2 a boring 2 hour romantic comedy with
by mr. profit
Yet people loved the hell out of that piece of shit movie. So hey, if Kong has more action than that it should do well.
-
Nov 28, 2005 11:53:34 AM CST
The teen girls were only one demo that Titanic appealed to
by citizen arcane
It was a chick flick with some action and breif nudity for the pre-www teen boy crowd (not everyone had access to the www in '97). Fortunatly for Cameron, chicks can be forgiving in the writing dept so he got away with that terribly contrived and cliched love story. But enough of that. To hear Jackson talk, he didn't blow his whole load on the trailer, as it appears, so maybe there's a lot more action and monsters than we think. As for Gone With the Wind, it's really hard to make comparisons between how much movies made back then and how much they make now and I'm not talking about inflation. It was an entiely different culture. Movies were huge events then. There were very few movies released every year and they stayed around for a long time. And when they were gone, they were gone. You didn't have a 3 month wait until you could watch it in your home theater after purchasing it for $15 Excuse me, $.05, adjusted for inflation. It's a lot more difficult to make a definitive list of the most watched films ever made than simply adjusting for inflation. But it was popular and it, like most of the biggest films of all time, did have a chick flick aspect to it. Kong could too, if done a certain way. It might be hard not to trip over that line into the absurd. On paper it looks like the guy who did Dead Alive making a movie about beastiality with Jack Black. Sounds better than Snakes on a Plane.
-
Nov 28, 2005 11:58:52 AM CST
Back then, they did not count gross right? Just admission?
by mr. profit
I swear I read that somewhere before. Titanic made the most money, but GWTW had the highest admissions for any film. Can someone clear that up for me please?
-
that Ask Jeeves ad up at the top right of the page looks like he's stroking an invisible cock? Maybe it's just me. And if Kong is half as good as LOTR, it will be great, and certainly worth seeing in the theater.
-
I think what we all really care about is that Nick and Jessica broke up.
-
Nov 28, 2005 12:05:07 PM CST
One more factor for Kong's success... Older people in their
by mr. profit
Who don't go to movies. But will turn out for this one. I was over at my mom's house and she asked me if my brother and I could take her to see Kong when it comes out. I dont even remember the last movie she saw in the theater.
-
I'm new the Kong discussion. I'd only seen bits and pieces of the original so I rented it over the weekend and saw it. I thought it was very good. Obviously for the 1930's the effects were remarkable. As for the Peter Jackson version, the problem will be that the original was great because it was groundbreaking, and as far as I know, we're not going to see effects that we haven't seen in Jurassic Park, The Hulk, Star Wars, Lord of the Rings and a bunch of other movies that run the gamet from lousy to outstanding. So as we say so often, there has to be something more substanative than just the special effects. The story of Kong then seems pretty simple. A savage beast finds a bit of humanity in him when he encounters the beauty, but ultimately, his own brutal nature and the savagery of man lead to his destruction. It's not a bad theme, but it is pretty straightforward. It's a bit like the simple fairy tale theme of good vs evil from Star Wars which featured groundbreaking special effects, but when the new episodes were released and the effects weren't quite so amazing compared to it's peer films of the day, well, I think in most people's opinions the new trilogy was lacking. True, those were prequels, not a remakes, but the same result may apply - a considerable financial success, but a muted critial one. It's not apples to apples, but I suspect that this film will ultimately be considered good, but not great. Then again there was a film with a pretty simple theme a few years ago - love conquers all - that made more money and won more awards than any film ever made. It was something about a boat sinking.
-
and the animal kingdom agrees with me. gotta love it. used to drink Coke like water, until i ended up in the ER and found out i was developing holes in my stomach, though can't blame that all on the Coke. still, no carbonated beverages for me now, unless its an IBC rootbeer once in a while as a treat. mmmmmm good. have tried splenda in my coffee though and didn't care for it, but hey, to each his own.
-
How much is Coke fucking paying you to spam these boards? It's starting to get ridiculous. I haven't seen someone pimp stuff this blatantly, well, since the last time Kevin Smith was here pushing his Viewaskew stuff.
-
Sorry bout calling them Lazer Swords, I read to much on the Jedi universe. I forgot I who i was dealing with here.
-
Nov 28, 2005 12:51:19 PM CST
Ok, Thanksgiving weekend is over, I expect a shitload of new tal
by shermdawg
Heh, but I'm picking up World of Warcraft, so I probably won't care.
-
Nov 28, 2005 12:58:19 PM CST
mr.profit, spiderman 2 was a 2hr and 7 minute comic book movie w
by jig98
the romance was part of the story and yes, it slowed the freaking movie down but then it wouldn't be spiderman without a story
-
Nov 28, 2005 1:02:08 PM CST
If you guys weren't such fat fucks you wouldn't have to
by citizen arcane
Now, as for that apparent extra 1 1/2, I'm guessing that the bulk of it will be on the island, with the natives. They were fairly underused in the other two films and we really don't know much about them. Jackson likes detail in his worlds and they are an important part of the island. I also think there will be a lot more extruciatingly quiet and intimate scenes between Kong and Anne. The "Where the white women at?" New York scenes will probably be not much longer than in the other films. This is based on the script I read a couple years ago that was most likely changed and from hearing Jackson blather on about it. I think it'll turn out good but I seriously doubt that there will be a solid 3 hours of vital, uncuttable material.
-
And you still called them "Lazor Swords"? Then double-shame on you, sir!
-
no show for me. It's that simple. She was f*cking hot 'n' sexy with her whoreish behaviour in that film. I'm sure I w*cked off to her when I was 4 when I first saw it. I could remember back to that film and how even then, I was turned on by the fact that she seemed to love being abused and molested by the natives. Anyone else agree?
-
I actually just saw the original Kong this Thanksgiving weekend. I think I saw it as a little kid but I didn't remember it at all. I can totally see Jackson doubling the running time without making it boring. There's so many opportunities for character development that go unused; these people are on a ship for 6 weeks together and it's covered by a fade in the '33 version. Driscoll falls in love with Ann over the course of a single conversation (which is still better writing than Attack of the Clones). You don't know the names of any of the shipmates Kong shakes off the log, and Kong spends maybe 15 minutes "rampaging" New York. Three hours sounds fine to me.
-
Jeez, talk about a major thread jacking!
-
do you have anything going on in life outside of these boards.
just wondering....because you sure spen a lot of time on boards about a film you are not even going to see...kind of pathetic isn't it? you see i know i am pathetic..i know i am nerd but you have this tone that you are better than the people excited about this film like we are idiots yet you keep coming back here over and over repeating the same shit.....don't blame jackson for the prequels sucking.you have misplaced rage.
-
... i just saved a bunch of money on my car insurance with Geico.
-
Never heard of it.
-
at least, they have a link to it.
-
considering that HP is still drawing strong numbers and King Kong opens so soon after Narnia does. tough spot for Narnia to be in sandwiched between those two publicity machines. looks pretty good too, and i'll probably end up taking my kids opening weekend, especially since the older 3 are fans of the books. who knows, it does have a built in fanbase, like the LOTR movies, and i think this 9 minute trailer is an attempt to counter-act the publicity gorilla that is King Kong.
-
If this is indicative of what this movie has to offer than NO FUCKING THANK YOU. King FUCKING Kong looking at a fucking sunset? What the living hell? For 4 minutes?! Kong tossing the chick on his back for a ride? HOLY SHIT, this is Mighty Joe Young (the new version) on steroids. Someone please tell me this is a joke. Please let this be a joke. I was actually going to give this a chance. Kong flipping the chick on his back? What is this? GRAPE APE? Every ounce of terror was drained out. I DONT WANT A FUCKING SENSITIVE KONG! Ok, I'm totally joining the "haters" club.
-
I think it's necessary for a an opposing voice in the face of such blindly unquestioning adoration of mediocre filmmaking. And yes, i am better than you. And yes, if you were smart enough to enjoy them, the SW prequels were awesome. The average Jackson apologist most likely doesn't qualify though.
-
Nov 28, 2005 3:05:30 PM CST
It's obvious (to me) that Jackson is passionate about realiz
by jdanielp
The movie cost over 200 million bucks to make! It's a three hour epic! It's pushing computer animation and special effects to new highs! And above all, it is made with the great passion of a gifted artist! People complain that computer animated life doesn't capture the soul of REAL life. But I'm guessing that Jackson's "KING KONG" is ...THE ...movie that will cross this barrier. Have we already forgotten who is portraying KONG via motion-capture??? Peter Jackson just might turn out to be the new Spielberg. And Harry had better take a box of tissues ...and have paramedics on stand-by, just in case.
-
Nov 28, 2005 3:10:17 PM CST
When's Mos Def going to get back into the rap game? Black o
by seppukudkurosawa
You know, seeing as how this talkback's degenerated into talk of the new Coke (no, not the one with the tap water in it thilly), I guess that comment was on-topic. Anyway fuck those on-topic whores, a person reads the talkback to sit back and be entertained by those crazy people who have not only crossed the line between sanity and insanity, but have fucking triple-jumped over the thing. How do you expect me to stay on topic, we've not been thrown enough fuel to talk about Kong anymore. Yes sirree, he's an ape. For now I think I'm gonna run a wide berth around these Kong articles. At least until Harry gives us something to chew.
-
...is does Godzilla or Kong win in this version? Will the Oriental version have an alternate ending? Also, I fucked Naomi Watts in the ass. Hard.
-
was when Kong turns his back on her like "TALK TO THE HAND"... He's playing hard to get! A fucking MONKEY! ANd then he tosses her on his shoulder like GIGANTOR... WHY ISN"T ANYONE CALLING FOR PETER JACKSON'S HEAD ON A SPEAR FOR THIS??!!! And SEPPUKUD I did release another album called THE NEW DANGER, but it was admittedly not as good as my first.
-
Spider-Man 2 was an incredibly moving and well crafted story, not some nontop trainwreck of action set pieces loosely strung together for idiot Do The Dew fanboys. If Kong's story is half as compelling as Spider-Man's 2s, it'll be a great movie.
-
... I think I shall see that AND Kong, and be a happy boy this holiday season. And MOSDEF, ironic how you named yourself after one of the more intelligent, eloquent guys out there, yet lack those traits yourself.
-
..where i don't curse my lack of intelligence for not understanding the deep textured layers of jar jar binks. Sometimes i go to the library to try and expand my mind so that i may finally appreciate the love scenes on naboo and it's rich wonderful shakespearean dialogue..the comparison of padmes skin against the harsh sands which still torment the well rounded and well written teen anakin character. i mean for me it might sound like the worse dialogue i have ever heard in anything including porno butif i had your intellect i would be able to see that it is some of the finest writing ever laid down to page.
i wish ...oh how i wish i possessed a brain which made me completely capable of taking in all the deep talk of midichlorians and people losing the will to live when they have just given birth to twins....having just enough strength to name them in case we didn't know who they were and then just stopping herself from living. even though the robot doctor says there is nothing physically wrong with her.
one day after years of reading and research i may come to understand that the two headed podrace announcer saying "thats gotta hurt" is not actually one of the worst 'comedic" decisions by any director ever but that it is actually a brilliant piece or ironic comedy the likes of which have never been seen...i just wish i was smarter and could see all of this. if i was perhaps i could finally see the acting peformances for what they are...too brilliant to measure .. take palpatine in SITH for example... for a foolish brain like mine it might be seen as, how do i put this intelligently...uum....yes..thats it... "fucking hammy" but if my brain functioned better I would be able to see it is actually a brilliant piece of subtle underplay.
i love you indiana clones. -
Nov 28, 2005 3:45:09 PM CST
I have definitive proof that AICN has jumped the shark
by seppukudkurosawa
seppukudkurosawa writes: "At least until Harry gives us something to chew." It's been all of, what twenty minutes, and nobody's suggested that Harry give us his sorely-neglected cock to chew on? For shame, talkbackers, for shame!
-
Pot Bellies are sexy. I would punch kong in his pot belly.
-
Ok I was laying the hyperbole on pretty thick, but forgive me. I hadn't seen the original in years and was blown away when I saw it this weekend (even though it was pretty racist at times). I was really looking forward to PJs remake but the preview stunned me. I was having a little fun ranting like a madman about it. So yeah, um, I don't lack intelligence or eloquence!
-
And it wasn't great. Better than i thought a raw piece of the film might be though. And at least Jackson is pumping some colour into his images now, even if it is only to make the film more palatable to chicks.
-
Oh, and Diet Coke rules all, as does "sensitive" Kong. And I don't even like chick flicks. Fuck Jane Austen.
-
Nov 28, 2005 4:17:34 PM CST
"And yes, if you were smart enough to enjoy them, the SW prequel
by mr nice gaius
Then that must mean I was TOO smart to enjoy them. Seriously - "Jackson apologists"? "Mediocre filmmaking"? Apparently, the people who hate Jackson are those who can't get over the fact that he bested Star Wars with LOTR. You know it's true. You CAN'T deny it. You can refuse to accept it...but you know I'm right. The world knows I'm right. Everyone's favorite childhood fantasy movie series was finally outdone in nearly everyway by LOTR. They are just better quality films. But if you want to nitpick what you've seen of "King Kong" so far because it makes you feel better about liking SW so much, that's perfectly fine. But I would venture to say that makes you look like a "Lucas Apologist".
-
You have only SOME talent . mostly we enjoy it somewhat because we loved the originals.
-
Nov 28, 2005 4:22:18 PM CST
For the love of Christ can we drop the LOTR/SW bullshit please?
by citizen arcane
And I CAN deny it. I DID like SW better but guess what, that's my opinion. Can we move on?
-
Gladly, sir. Gladly. What would you like to discuss? Art galleries? Food? Skateboarding?
-
my mom was floored and i even put in side comments."oh, you want a ride? ok, don't touch my ass, though."
-
Nov 28, 2005 4:39:01 PM CST
"People like to SEE stuff. They prefer Light on the Subject." T
by minderbinder
Seriously, don't you understand the concept of mood? You don't think movies should have scenes set at night? Or in dark environments? All scenes should be brightly lit? And I'm boggled by the insistence that the movie is trying to somehow hide the FX, in the trailer I can see the FX (CGI, models and all) perfectly well.
-
Why bother? Haven't you read of the coming of the movie by The Lion? It will change the world and make everything else ever put on film irrelevant. Why talk of these other movies, we should just sit and await the coming of the masterpiece...
-
for real, i used to love em when i was a kid, but now? no thanks. come to think about it, i used to love tapioca pudding as a kid too.............
-
Nov 28, 2005 5:24:32 PM CST
"Apparently, the people who hate Jackson are those who can't
by indiana clones
So why did more people see the SW prequels than LOTR, despite getting 'burned' with each successive release? SW vs LOTR only surfaced when today's generation of nerds, starved of cultural identity and desperate to take part in a phenomenon comparable with SW, latched onto LOTR with awe-inspiring ferocity and quite rudely claimed SW and Lucas as yesterday's news. Prior to this, Star Wars lovers did the decent thing and just shut up, smug in the knowledge that SW would forever be the greatest. The antagonism started up out of silly LOTR fans insecurities. Nothing more. I know a few LOTR fans and they're cool guys. It's only morons who feel the need to berate out of context.
-
I thought you were "liberal" The Zulus has the most awesome military machine of its time. When the British came with their guns, they didn't even have a change against the spears and other "primitive" weapons. It goes to say, you can attempt to be an open minded libaral, but when you say you like primative, you display yourself a a closet racist- but back to the movie. I'm really interested in seeing this update of Kong. Not a big fan of the original, but if anyone can make a classic (out of someone else's work) it's PJ. Just saw the 9 minute Narnia trailer and I must say, between Harry Potter, Narnia, and Kong the box office may finally get its nuts back and give us a good movie
-
Nov 28, 2005 6:12:12 PM CST
From here on out it's the Ringbearer9 & Indiana Clones show
by iamlegolas
until the next KONG talkback crops up
-
...then is Andy Serkis the new Richard Dreyfuss?
-
"Why? What's gonna draw families or women to this film? It's about a big fucking ape...that's it folks."
You're forgetting the fact that people lined up for blocks in 1933! Guess what, women, men and children of all ages were in that line! So if the original was a universal draw then you saying that this one will not be doesn't make sense. Also the Depression was in full swing at that time and people still went out and bought tickets at 10c a pop when they could have been buying booze and hookers. By the way, I respect all of you. -
...then fuck civilized cultures anyway. sure, the Zulus were no pushovers, but they were no angels eithers, and were where the British encountered them only because they had used their superior military force to kill and drive out the people who were truly indigenous(sp?) to the area. just goes to show people don't have to be light-skinned to be invading, bloodthirsty, land-stealers. what the british eventually did to them is the same they had done to others, only difference being they had more similar pigment to the people they drove out. one sure way to end up in the "primitive" category is to be pacifistic, non-slave-owning, non-militaristic, non-materialistic, spiritualists. whew, my anti-establishment rant for the day. that is all.
-
post one competely original creative idea on this website that is free from any influence whatsoever. Go ahead! Just one idea! I'm sure you have come up with a couple when you're thinking how cool it would be to make your own movie someday. Right? Right?!?
-
Nov 28, 2005 7:49:41 PM CST
"So why did more people see the SW prequels than LOTR, despite g
by slappy jones
they didn't. what you wrote is what we call a lie. are you sure you are not sean hannity?
here is a list of the box office standings of the prequels and LOTR on the all time world wide charts.
2. ROTK 4. The Two Towers 5. The Phhantom Menace 9. Fellowship of the Ring 11. Revenge of the Sith 23. Attack of the Clones
wow, when you look at that to my mind it makes me think that more people worldwide saw LOTR than SW.
i didn't want to get into the whole "this made more money than that" argument because it is silly but you out and out lied.
total gross for the prequels 2422.1 billion
total gross for LOTR trilogy 2914.6
that is a difference of nearly 500 million in favour of LOTR. that is a lot of money. it is fine you don't like LOTR and that you think KONG is going to suck etc etc and so on and so on but the figures i listed are what we call "facts". the statement you made is what we call a "delusion".fuck it i am going to go all out and give my analysis of those figures....so fellowship comes out and is a huge hit..but two towers makes more money because dvd etc etc and the positive response to fellowship is overwhelming that brings out more people to see it then the popularity grows so much that rotk becomes the second film in history to make over a billion. not bad going for three hour borefests with bad effects huh?as for star wars well fate wasn;t as kind it seems...
phantom menace comes out and is huge...was always going to be this is star wars we are talking the most well loved franchise in cinema history...which i might add i fucking love....but menace comes out and is lame. the biggest disappointment in history so a hell of a lot less people turn out for clones which fails to get even close to making the top ten films of all time let alone coming anywhere near any of the 3 rings films. then we have SITH glorious sith..the promised return of vader and the last star wars film ever so of course it does better..it gets good reviews and it is actually a much better film than the other two so it does great.but it still fails to make more than any of the LOTR films. so how can you say with a straight face that more people saw the prequels than LOTR? i am not saying the prequels bombed or anything like that..they all made shitload of money and each one was a financial success but the facts speak for themselves indiana. -
..and i camped out in atent for phantom menace tickets so that is saying something, i feel dirty
-
i am a cock. i am sorry about my post. i said within it that i didn't want to get into the whole who made more money thing but indiana clones drives me crazy with his crap and he lied ...i tried to fight it but i couldn't do it.....i try to fight replying to these assholes everyday but they have got my number and they know how to make me answer the call!!
-
And for no reason imparticular, I have a sneaking suspicion that The Lovely Bones falls through, or at the least he backs off it into a producer role and lets someone else step in and direct that one.
-
Sand people/Tuskan Raider. It's all preferance. I knew what I wrote.
-
Nov 29, 2005 12:27:45 AM CST
"That should tell you a bit about Peter, and just how much love
by tophat
That's all that matters anymore, isn't it? Passion. Passion for the work. Doesn't matter if its genuinely saying something new. Just as long as the people involved have great love and respect for the material, all is forgiven. This film should not have been remade. I'm not speaking as a "fanboy" or whatever other name the pundits of this site have given the people solely responsible for its success this week. I am speaking as someone fed up. Fed up with the constant excuses given for mediocrity by people who supposedly respect the craft. Excuse after excuse keeps being given to support this art form not moving one inch. New technology is not progress. Repetition is not progress. Passion for the sake of either one of these, is-not-progress. We need to stop making movies for the fans. We need to stop hiring fans to make them. Fans favor repetition. Constant reminders of why they're fans in the first place. Genuine advancement cannot flower from this. Yes, this is "just a blockbuster" and when you go to these types of movies you "just want to have fun." But, this is NOT how you are thinking or promoting this as, is it? This is confirmation. Confirmation that the fan is right. Like most of us you go to movies not as an exploration into the unknown, but to confirm your prejudices and to dismiss other's. Notice how much you champion digital film-making. Special effects. Technology. How you praise homages. Passion. All things you know. Things that you can point at and go "exactly." This is why movies exist for you, and this is why the art in films is dying. Hollywood. Please, I'm begging you. Wrestle what remains of this great art form away from the fans. Hire true artists who don't think new camera angles, 3-D, and cgi are water marks for greatness. Stop listening to the mechanics. The computer programers. The children. Because that is what a fan is. A person following some sort of diagram for psedu-accomplishment. They either obey word-for-word what it says, or they do the exact opposite to *feel* new and different, or they fall somewhere inbetween. They look back at history to pinpoint excuses for their ignorance. Then wrap it all up in a bow of romanticism. That is why these movies always can be better. Too many fans. Not enough artists.
-
These figures are VERY close. And Lucas didn't have to put out two versions of each film to reach his mark. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
-
To suggest that "the art in films is dying," is to contradict the facts. More artists are making more movies than ever before (precisely because of technology, by the way). There are more film festivals that highlight and promote low-budget, independent films than ever before. And to suggest that there is less "artistry" in escapist fare is, I'm afraid, mere snobbery. Go watch a few good movies (it's easier now than ever before) and don't feel so bad for the medium.
-
*****Yes, your bladders will be tested by PJ's three-hour monkey. Are you up to the test? May the best bladder win!
-
The extended versions certainly sold extra dvds, but they weren't the reason that each movie was more successful than the last, box-office-wise. HOHOHO (Merry Christmas, everyone).
-
I mean.... we're talking the monitary gross of each trilogy, right??
-
"More artists are making more movies than ever before (precisely because of technology, by the way)." The cheapest form of art is a pencil and piece of paper, but I wouldn't consider any of today's writers the next Shakespeare or Homer. "There are more film festivals that highlight and promote low-budget, independent films than ever before." Film festivals program their schedules just like your local multipex; whatever they think will get the most buzz, they show. Case in point; when Andrew Bujalski was promoting his film FUNNY HA HA around, a film festival expressed interest. Only, they wouldn't put it on their schedule unless Bujalski signed a contract guaranteeing he give his film ONLY to them, so if the film took off they could brag that they were the only ones who had it at THEIR festival. Bujalski declined, only to encounter the exact same barriers at TWO other film festivals. Now, keep in mind, these were not bigtime festivals like Cannes or Sundance. These were small festivals whose goals are to "highlight and promote low-budget, independent films." Bujalski finally had to settle for selling the film to IFC (It still airs sometimes. If you have the channel, check it out, its great, imo.) "And to suggest that there is less "artistry" in escapist fare is, I'm afraid, mere snobbery." The word "escapist" more than proves the lack of artistry; art is not made to take you away from reality. It is made to show you reality. "Escapist fare" is made for the largest demographic possible. Therefore, there is no reality within, only generalizations. But, people have different ideas about what "art" is; the majority of what is taught to students in art classes at schools is not art, imo. Thus, art is declining.
-
Aikimoe is right, Mr. Hat. Only a sanctimonious snob would call for the cessation of film production which doesn't appeal to his or her tastes instead of rejoicing in (or at least accepting) cinematic pluralism. For film supremacists like yourself, Mr. Hat, poo-pooing whole genres and/or swathes of films, directors, as well as afficinados is an easy way out. Instead of championing the creation of the films you prefer, you instead call for the eradication of what you perceive to be competition from inferior cinema. You, sir, are nothing but a pontificating elitist and every bit as obnoxious as the films you so apparently hate.
-
Nov 29, 2005 4:27:14 AM CST
""Escapist fare" is made for the largest demographic possible. T
by docpazuzu
Apparently, you're ignorant as well.
-
Point taken. However, you have given me many names just for voicing my opinion. Is it for the eradication of what you perceive to be competition from an inferior point-of-view? Perhaps you are nothing but a pontificating elitist as well, having stated no examples to back your views like Aikimoe and I have for ours. Only childish name-calling.
-
When it comes to film, I reserve name-calling for individuals who vie for some sort of ideological or aesthetic supremacy at the expense of pluralism. Does my support of the idea that there is room for all types of films make me a pontificating elitist? Perhaps, but one who supports all forms of cinematic expression. Rather than launch into a sociocultural lecture on the importance and multilayered texture of popular culture, I'll merely refer you to virtually any book by John Fiske or Sarah Thornton. Bordwell & Thompson's books Film Art and Making Meaning are also highly reccommended, as is Laughing Screaming by William Paul. I know this might be a revolutionary thought to you, but it actually is possible to have The Bicycle Thief, Deep Throat, Animal House, The Phantom Menace, A Man Escapes, Fawlty Towers, Nemesis II, Amarcord, On Deadly Ground, Jaws, 12 Angry Men, Once Upon a Time in America, Zombie, Nekromantik, Sound of Music, Ran, Fanny & Alexander, Godzilla vs Megalon, LOTR, The Wraith, The Parallax View, Armageddon, Come And See and Bad Girls IV in your DVD shelf without spontaneously combusting. Personally, I don't trust anyone who only has "good" films and literature on their shelves.
-
sure are repetitious when the same clowns always come up with the same predictable, lame non-arguments. You know who you are, I don't have to mention any names. We get your point, bozo's. PJ sucks. His films suck. Anyone who likes what PJ does sucks. Alright already. You sound like fundamentalist christian right wingers: you scream so loud about what you perceive to be right that it drowns out all other voices. Because you are afraid of them. Afraid that someone in the crowd might have something to say that would actually, you know, make you doubt your beliefs. I suggest we all go and watch this movie when it is on the screen, then come back and see what we can say about it. // To end that particular discussion: I have recently been seeing all Star Wars films with my kids: Ep I and II suck horribly, Ep III is somewhat watchable, Ep IV is somewhat likeable, Ep V is good but not what is is cranked up to be, Ep VI is horrible. So there. Even the boys thought so (they are 6 and 8). The DID ask for a re-screening of LOTR afterwards. Nuff' said.
-
While 2 thousand billion would have been a cool result for SW, it didn't quite get that :). As for your comparison, it is incorrect. LOTR made $1,031,845. The Star Wars prequels made $1,191,612. You should have tried getting your figures from somewhere more impartial than the usual orc-humping outlets.
-
A monster in a big city with "people trying to get him". PJ is pulling a Rosebud-Hearst-Kane-Wells here.
-
Nov 29, 2005 7:27:18 AM CST
"So why did more people see the SW prequels than LOTR" Are you
by minderbinder
Looks like it's the other way around. And BSA, only one cut was released theatrically (the extended versions were only released for a week or so each)...and there ARE multiple versions of the SW movies. Remember?
-
"As for your comparison, it is incorrect. LOTR made $1,031,845. The Star Wars prequels made $1,191,612. You should have tried getting your figures from somewhere more impartial than the usual orc-humping outlets." Excuse me, but it's only the Lucas-humpers who want to use the North American box office instead of worldwide grosses as a comparison. A nice way to mislead and obfuscate the situation. ROTK made over one billion all by itself. But you knew that, didn't you? Didn't you?
-
Comparing box office figures. For shame! It's money and it's lots of it. My point? I have 2 for you. 1) when you open your eyes, the money all came from people who saw BOTH star wars and Lord of the rings. There are straglers, there are hardcores. But we have all seen them, and they all got our money. pretty bloody equally i might add. What we're seeing her is a tipping of the scales in each favour as if it somehow magically bring the better films to light. I love TPM. I don't like TFOTR. I Really like the 1st and 3rd act of AOTC. I Enjoy 80% of TTT. I FUCKING LOVE SITH! I think Return of the king is cool, but have real issues with it's gay ending. You are all the same. I know it, you know it. shut up. 2) I forgot what 2 was.
-
Pazuzu. Dude. Do you really keep a stack of DVD's that you don't like because you don't trust people who only have good movies? I'm trying to see the application to myself here...... No man, I don't buy or hord any kind of shit I don't like. Zen Purge. Good for the mind and soul.
-
Nov 29, 2005 8:43:29 AM CST
Something else to make Indy sad...SW prequel trilogy isn't e
by minderbinder
Yep, HP 1-3 made more money worldwide than Episodes 1-3. Just wanted to throw some gas on the whiny fanboy fire. And BSA, I agree that Indy Clones is pretty shameful for bringing up box office numbers...
-
Of course not. There's a difference between what I "like" and what I consider to be "good". There are films the qualitative superiority of which I would never dispute, but which don't appeal to me personally. There are also terrible films which I absolutely adore. What I meant with my statement was people who only own films or books which have been deemed of a higher quality by cultural consensus. Instead of cultivating any kind of personal taste, they adopt "safe" titles for fear of ridicule, titles which they can easily defend with the arguments of others. However, I do freely admit to owning a number of films so dreadful that their dire nature in itself is a source of (sometimes painful) enjoyment.
-
I did always feel a little self conscious about Terminal Velocity. But damit. That film just speaks to me.
-
Who cares what 3rd world savages think of films? They probably only went to LOTR to see what a tree looks like. And the Potter movies rule.
-
JEEZUS CHRISTO. I love it! I knew the moment I posted "the people who hate Jackson are those who can't get over the fact that he bested Star Wars with LOTR" someone would jump. But how does saying something like that immediately turn into a Box Office Gross Research WankFest??? That was not my point at all. The point was/is that LOTR is a finer, higher quality grade of films than the SW prequels (i.e. acting, drama, inspired spectacle, etc). Of course, this is MY opinion fellas. And it is so because watching LOTR does not insult my intelligence like the SW prequels. Sorry...I love George and I love the OT but, come on. With that being said, I think some may have failed to consider that LOTR already had a built-in fanbase that spanned 50 years or so as a result of the books. So, it wasn't just "today's generation of nerds, starved of cultural identity and desperate to take part in a phenomenon comparable with SW". Far, far from it. Anyway, this is all old news. I mean, this is a Kong Talkback right?
-
Worst cop-out ever. I have to admit, few haters flame out as impressively and repeatedly as Indiana "LOTR has a communist subtext" Clones. Bravo, sir.
-
Thats not Kong, thats Leonardo with Kate Winslet. What happened to the bad ass Kong in the background on this site? I'll stick with the original version while others want to see Titanic mixed with JP. The SFX were not even impressive, the ride on Kongs back was approaching laughable. Oh well, roll on Munich.
-
Jessica Lange is staggeringly beautiful. Jeff Bridges is the ultimate everyman. And the Twin Towers were the ultimate representation of man's hubris on this earth! Long live dee beeg monkee!
-
Just a few things about Domestic and World wide. I'm assuming you're American. Yes your domestic truely is impressive while the world is nothing but dirt and radiation. Oh, but here's something for you to consider. LotR was shot outside of your 'domestic'. That would make it somewhere world wide, no? All on location footage of star wars was shot 'outside' of America, therefore 'not' Domestic' therefore 'worldwide'. Never mind tatooine, but I think some of those italian shots had trees. Yes i think it's time you got out of the George Bush geographical glasses and maybe did some travelling yourself. You might get a little surprise how pretty the world actually is. Man, it'd be fun to spend a day in your head.
-
I'm British.
-
Nov 29, 2005 11:35:19 AM CST
Would someone please explain to me how he or she found "communis
by morgoth
I mean, I'm no "Tolkien Scholar" type snob but I have been reading the thing regularly (and everything else published) for years and I never got even a scintilla of communism. Parallels to WWII, sure, but not communism. No allegory either...Tolkien was very keen on making that point to people who insisted they knew his story better than he did (sound like a certain AICN poster?). ** As for Kong, I saw the preview in front of Harry Potter
-
Just like Erica Rose Campbell. But she has a stinky poo hole just like you. The world is not as bad as you would have us believe. But British, I understand. (Joking)
-
Your argument rests entirely on your definition of "art." The word "art" is not an adjective. It's a noun. It's whatever an artist makes, a product of the artist's personal aesthetic values. So you can't say that stuff you don't care for has "less artistry" than stuff you do care for. It's all art. Some of it is art that Tophat (or aikimoe) likes. Some of it is art that Tophat (or aikimoe) doesn't like. But it's all art. And just because film festivals are run in ways you would run them, doesn't change the fact that more and more films are being made today than ever before. You might not like them as much as you like "Homer or Shakespeare" but that has everything to do with your tastes and nothing to do with the sincere, artistic endeavors of unprecedented numbers of filmmakers.
-
Do you understand FADS at ALL? Where the fuck are acid washed jeans? Beanie Babies? POGS? Fads never last, the pass like a kidney stone in the night. You see monkey lad, Leo's popularity was at it's peak during Titanic, as I mentioned. Nothing can sustain that type of popularity for ever...unless he dies. Let me ask you this, how the FUCK did it make 600 million then if it was not for repeat sales, in large numbers? YOU tell me that, as that film was not worth that amount in single ride tickets, let alone double or triple. You think guys went to see it two or three times, self respecting guys that is? Every time I saw an ad for that film it was a bunch of teen girls telling the camera that they've seen it 10, 12 even 15 times. My theater was FULL of nothing but girls and my dumb ass. Jesus H. Christ couldn't pull in 600 million and look at the Christian fan base in this world.
-
I guarantee you that there were several members of my and my wife's family who went to see Titanic for various reasons. None of them were teenage girls, they were all young adults or older. Many of them either never go to the movies or go once a year at most. Often these people will go to see what the "fuss" is about, and whether they like or dislike the film, they've already bought the ticket. Even my wife's grandmother saw the film, and she hasn't been to the theater in years to see anything else. Multiple viewings by teens can account for a lot off box office, but they can in no way explain the unique success of that film. Titanic cut a wide demographic swath. Teen girls will NOT get you the plateaued box office where the third weekend of the film outgrosses the opening weekend. Those are insane numbers, and can not be explained by one demographics repeat viewings. Crediting teen girls for Titanic's enormous box office is simply a way for people who disliked the film to pretend - in retrospect - that it didn't have wide appeal. It did. Whether it holds up years later as deserving of that much money is a different question.
-
..but I don't go to movies looking for flaws. I go for the total experience.
-
Nov 29, 2005 1:42:59 PM CST
indianan clones sounds a lot like rush limbaugh don't you th
by slappy jones
first he posts something that is incorrect...he lies...then he gets called on it so he starts distorting facts.....only focusing on the figures that suit him and when called on it again he doesn't say "oh shit o.k. you were right...sorry about that but more north americans did see sw than lotr" no he says who cares what third world savages think?? hahahaha. wow....indiana clones you are awesome.....indiana claimed more people saw SW than they did LOTR. that was his claim and i couldn't fight the urge to correct him. it was too strong. i knew he was wrong..so i corrected his post. and proved that he was totally wrong. but won't admit that he was wrong ....at the end of the day i really don't care what made what ...all 6 films got my money....more than once i might add plus dvd sales but just admit you were wrong indiana clones. it would make you look much better than calling the rest of the world savages. you just sound like the stereotypical ignorant ugly american. gives us all a bad name. i am sorry for continuing this little fight. this is the most nedy geekish thing i have ever gotten into on these boards but fuck it...this is the aint it cool messageboards....we aren't exactly the height of hip are we....
-
truly sorry ... damn i post a big self righteous post and get totally fucked for it!!
oh well...my apologies to indiana. but you were still wrong. -
...I'd rather watch a 5-hour movie that was engrossing, than something lame that clocks in at 89 mins...
-
Thanks for the breakdown. Though I'm sure your breakdown is tongue-in-cheek, it sounds fantastic! Did you do the same for "Batman Begins"? Because that turned out great, too!
-
but the mutiple ending joke ..i don't get it?...oh hang on...oh i see hahahahaa because ROTK had lots of endings right? ahahahahaha wow how fucking clever and original.
has anyone actually read the LOTR books? if you thought the film has a lot of endings you should read the book...it could have been a hell of a lot worse. plus after 9+ hours with these characters it would have been kind of stink to just go "the ring is destroyed..yay" roll credits.....don't ya think? anyway...i hope they do make a sequel...didn't that joke in the production diary of son of kong fighting nazis sound fucking awesome? -
...I remember a time when you'd engage in debates from the get-go, proudly flaunting your cinehate as soon as a new talkback arrived which dealt with any movie which might actually be popular with moviegoers. Alas, since your humiliating defeat in the face of Batman Begins, you've been but a shadow of your former self, skulking around in half-dead talkbacks trying to get your feeble licks in without attracting too much attention to yourself. Your hating skills are puny these days, especially compared to the insanity of Ringbearer9 and self-immolations of Indiana Clones. Weak, moviemack, weak.
-
EXT. ALLEY - NIGHT
JACK hurries down an ALLEY., still towing ANN. She is ANGRY ...
TEARFUL.
ANN
Jesus Christ ! How could you do this to him? How could you do this?
JACK
(agitated)
Come on, come on! We gotta keep moving!
ANN
( sobbing)
He's gonna die! They'll kill him!
JACK
(angry)
Take to look out there ..- Have you seen what he's done? You're talking
about a crazy animal!
ANN
(screaming)
You're the animals - all of you! -
You're all suspects, and you're all me. So, I am in fact posting this to myself in my Mr. Nice Gaius disguise. According to homewrecker it has something to do with AICN being infiltrated by an Israeli agent for reasons which have yet to be explained. No, I'm not making this up. Yes, thank you, GoatZinger -- or should I say, me.
-
especially when you're dealing with AICN and nut-cases like me/Ginger Twit. Laugh at us, try not to be like us, just make sure you don't forget to be entertained by us.
-
Nov 29, 2005 5:45:09 PM CST
When the fuck are we going to hear who Topher Grace is playing i
by vinceklortho
-
batman begins will indeed haunt the dreams of moviemack FOREVER!
-
Nov 29, 2005 7:40:13 PM CST
Now you see it. You're amazed. You can't believe it. You
by orionsangels
Throw your arms across your eyes and scream, scream for your life! Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!
-
Yes Jessica Lange is still one of the hottest bitches on film regardless of her age. Naomi Watts is more going for that girl with a giant ape puppy thing which is ok.Now excuse me while I go and jerk off to a topless Dwan.
-
Nov 29, 2005 11:35:54 PM CST
Jessica Lange's in KONG76 has the most perfect female body I
by orionsangels
Who didn't toss their monkey to that? come on guys, you know you did. you squirted that banana
-
We gotta get to that island see... so i can make my movin picture. you'll be a star I tell ya, a regular star! - I hope in the new version they don't forget they're in the 30's and use modern words, like yo what up G! lol no.
-
Looking damn good in my opinion. I am already in love with Kong's personality. Head over to Joblo.com and check out the 4mins of footage im talking about. Can't wait!
-
I don't know all the talkbackers, but I can tell you DocPazuzu is def slappy Jones. All the others are possibly the one off names who mysteriously back up either.
-
That movie was trash. I'm sick of hearing otherwise. Give me the two characters of Bruce wayne and Batman, who are both the stars of the film, and you never see the two men in the same room together. THAT'S BATMAN. And while you're at it, give me some cool action movie music played by a monster orchestra. Batman is just some poonce arse hole dressed up and running around boon docks fighting people who should just be shot for being scared of 'the bat man'. Yeah i did not like this film.
-
Nov 30, 2005 5:31:20 AM CST
I rented the Kong game and it has some footage not in the traile
by citizen arcane
Unfortunatly, I suck at video games so I haven't even met the natives on the island yet but I have to say, Jack Black is a little obnoxious. And I love Jack Black. I mean, I wouldn't swallow his load but I'd take a shot in the face from him. But he just talks like Jack Black and it takes you out of it a little.
-
Peter Jackson better not have cut the scene where Kong visits Tom Bombadil. That would rape my childhood.
-
....even though I thought the original was a piece of shit. The effects were so poor they took me out of the movie, and the story was weak too. This looks like it will build on those foundations. Still, the horror fan in me hopes that PJ drops all this big budget shit he's at lately and go back to making exciting stuff like Braindead, Bad Taste and Meet the Feebles.
-
The franchise started over, you have to start somewhere. The sequels will probably be more like your taste. You gotta know though, Batman Begins, is a realistic take on batman. What if a man really dressed up in a batsuit? What would that be like? I mean Bruce even questions himself in the movie, how silly it is for a grown man to be dressed as a bat. When we see that, we believe more in a batman. If you want a simple batman movie buy batman forever or batman & robin. If u want big music and over the top villiand and special effects. Buy batman 89. It's all been done. Not for me though. It was about time someone took Batman seriously and put character and story before effects and big music. Batman Begins is a classic film. 80% of the world agrees
-
I took your advice and watched Batman Forever and Batman 89. Fuck Batman and Robin. YOU watch that shit! I'm with the 80%, don't get me wrong. But I still feel let down. Because if we were supposed to be getting an all new batman then why did we have the Burton Batsuite? Remember that fan aft where it had the batsuite and it was made of cotton type materials. Batman in the comics has had a whole range of Costumes. If Batman is restarting, then he should go through some variations on the costume before settling on a big black form. Let him grow into Batman. Let the ledgend grow of a man dressed as a bat. No, He is no man. He IS the BAT man. Thats the Batman I know. and want. But yeah you're right the next films wil be more to my liking. Still don't like Christian Bale. The man is 'days of our lives'. Sorry.
-
Naomi watts aint got shit on her. I might go look at her naked right now.
-
Does Bombadil sing a Carjack Song to make Rhames go "Poof!" and disappear? Do the Hobbits still get their Blades of Westernesse or does Andy swipe them and use 'em to challenge Kong's Great Brown Flow? C'mon man, don't leave us hanging!
-
In fact, I think Peter Jackson is missing the mark if he doesn't have Jon Lovitz somewhere in the film (personally, I would have made him one of the reporters at the end--"Beauty and the Beast---yeah that's the ticket!")
-
Screenwriters suck.
-
"I think they've all cracked up and gone sappy!" They just don't write lines like that anymore.
-
The first three Batman movies shit on BB. There are even aspects of B&R that are better.
-
I'm sorry but all I have to do is think of that Kim Basinger line: "I just got to know. Are we gonna try and love each other?" and I know that your statement is utter, foolish nonsense. If "Batman Begins" contained nothing more than the Tumbler chase scene, it would still be better than all those past films combined. However, I will grant the occasional Jack N./Joker quote as leniancy.
-
"never rub another mans rhubarb"
best.line.ever. -
Actually, I was always fond of, "I'm the world's first fully functioning homicidal artist". I think that bit of dialog is the closest thing to the real Joker we got from that movie. Then again, you can't go wrong whenever Mark Hamill's Joker calls Batman "BatFink".
-
Nov 30, 2005 4:53:54 PM CST
What if a man really dressed up in a batsuit? What would that be
by neo zeed
He'd be shot dead. CNN would find his out his identity faster than Gotham Central. I felt it was afraid to have anything memorable (Arresting visuals,action,or quotable dialogue) lest it be scrutinized by fanboys. It was so afraid to be "bad" the creators forgot to be daring in a good way. BB played it the safe zone too much.
-
Damn, Mr. Clones, you certainly never cease to amaze in terms of blanket statements, baffling "facts", hilarious analysis and just plain ol' lunacy. You, Ringbearer9 and moviemack truly are the AICN Axis of Hate, a triumvirate of furious masturbators bent on the destruction of good taste and common sense wherever it may be found. Granted, the latter are in short supply in TalkBack, but that merely makes your collective efforts all the more astounding. I'm just enormously pleased that you three grind your teeth in your sleep every night as the inescapable fact that LOTR and BB were both critical and commercial successes (and that KK most likely will be as well) assails your fevered brains. Sleep tight, son.
-
Nov 30, 2005 5:21:07 PM CST
So, I just stopped by to see what weird Geekyness is going on in
by vinceklortho
and it never ceases to amaze that it is just a good dork mixture of Kong, some good Batman nuggets, and a sprinkle of Star Wars. Eh, let's just throw a little bit of LOTR for good measure; for spice. Looks like this talkback is baking good! MMMMmmmmmm...delicious!
-
If making a statement is a societal crime, it is dwarfed by its sinister cousin, that of criticising the making of statements.
-
a pirated copy is already available..but i'll still be in line on the 14th..GO KONG!!
-
Just got 2 tix from the good foolks at kongisking.net for the NYC world premiere this Monday. Hot Damn! I'll tell Petey you guys say he's awesome/he sucks Lucas' balls.
-
you'd be seeing a early screening of Kong next week. If you were me. I'm just sayin'....
-
Dec 01, 2005 2:15:51 AM CST
"its sinister cousin, that of criticising the making of statemen
by docpazuzu
It's called "debate", chief.
-
Kong dies
-
Dec 01, 2005 7:19:03 AM CST
Wow, you guys go off topic...SERIOUS QUESTION: iw there a direct
by minderbinder
And I mean download, , as in keep it on my had drive once I have the whole thing. I''m not downloading over 200 meg just to watch it once.
-
...that kossak dancing is the best form of dancing. Why would PJ need an extra 80mins to tell the KONG story? More kossak dancing!
-
Correct. I misread it. However, my initial interpretation certainly corresponded to what Mr. Clones was referring to -- especially since nobody has criticised his making of statements, but rather the statements themselves.
-
Where are the Kong reviews? It was screened last night!
-
and the general consensus is that it's great give or take a couple of cheesy moments between Naomi and the big digital ape. I figured that could be a problem.
-
2 of them loved it. but devin at chud quickly put some notes up ..he hadn't written his review yet but he was pretty mixed. loved some stuff didn't love others....he did say that kong himself looks astonishing and that the three leads are great but he was very mixed. he didn't like the pit sequence which is one of the things i am lookinf forward to most....i haven't seen any official published reviews yet. some critic on the news earlier said he saw it and he said it is a king of a movie and a sure fire winner. so expect lots of reviews any minute. has there been any narnia reviews yet?
oh and i see they are not screening aeon flux for critics..must be great huh.... -
Dec 01, 2005 10:02:12 PM CST
here is a transcript of the CNN report on it..she loved it.
by slappy jones
not a detailed review but she really liked it.......
....HAMMER: Time now for a SHOWBIZ TONIGHT exclusive. Director Peter Jackson`s "King Kong" is going to be released in theaters on December 14, but SHOWBIZ TONIGHT producer Jenny D`Attoma has already seen it. She was at the very first screening. She`s joining me live to give us a little sneak peek.
All right, Jenny, you get all the good perks with this job, don`t you?
JENNY D`ATTOMA, PRODUCER, "SHOWBIZ TONIGHT: I certainly do.
HAMMER: This has been in the works for nine years. Millions, literally tens of millions of people can`t wait to see this movie. What is your initial reaction to having seen it?
D`ATTOMA: My initial reaction is that Kong will be king at the box office. It really will. I mean, Peter Jackson did an amazing job in this movie. The effects, it just kept you at the edge of your seat for three hours
HAMMER: And is that what we`re going to be hearing people buzzing about? Because obviously, people are going to start writing about it over the course of the next week in the newspapers. What will be the biggest things that, you know, are going written about and buzzed about about this movie?
D`ATTOMA: I would say all the special effects, the scenery. He grew trees for Skull Island. I mean it was just unbelievable to see how much detail. The New York City streets in 1933, vintage cars, it was just -- it`s just extreme.
HAMMER: And certainly there are some surprise that, you know, I don`t want you to reveal because I don`t want any spoilers here, but let me in on something else, you know, since you got the inside track here?
D`ATTOMA: I just think seeing the enormity of "King Kong" on the screen and the way he looked so realistic and his empathy. And you see the way he plays off with Naomi Watts, you feel like he`s a person almost. You forget that he is this giant gorilla on screen.
HAMMER: And a lot of that comes down to special effects. As you said, those are spectacular. And Peter Jackson certainly was on the cutting edge of that with "The Lord of the Rings." He`s responsible for "The Lord of the Rings" movies, but he really even raised the bar with this film?
D`ATTOMA: Yes. He raised the bar, because he created New York City. He created Skull Island. He didn`t come to New York to do this. He did this in New Zealand on his own property, on his own lot. So it`s just amazing to me that all that was done on a stage.
HAMMER: All right. The original movie was done in 1933. The last remake was done in the 1970s. It was universally panned. This one will not be is what I`m sensing here.
D`ATTOMA: I don`t think so.
HAMMER: All right, Jenny. Well, good for you for having seen it. I look forward to it, as well. SHOWBIZ TONIGHT producer Jenny D`Attoma, thank you for joining us.
D`ATTOMA: Thank you.
HAMMER: And "King Kong" will arrive in theaters on December 14.
-
Dec 01, 2005 10:59:03 PM CST
has anyone watched the t rex fight over at kong is king??
by slappy jones
it is during the leno interview with naomi watts...and it is amazing. god i can't wait!!!!!!!
-
Dec 01, 2005 11:04:46 PM CST
the boston herald said it is going to be a monster smash.
by slappy jones
he loved it!
so some good reviews are coming through...i am sure there will be not so favourable ones but it is good so far... -
Dec 02, 2005 9:14:38 AM CST
R9, you're a fucking moron, even when it's in black in w
by minderbinder
"his empathy. And you see the way he plays off with Naomi Watts, you feel like he`s a person almost. You forget that he is this giant gorilla on screen." Nah, she doesn't mention anything about it being a good movie. We're all laughing at you, you fucking idiot.
-
Dec 02, 2005 9:17:55 AM CST
And what do you expect from something that's a sneak peak an
by minderbinder
The movie isn't out for a couple weeks, so official media outlets won't have real reviews before then, they are "vapid" because they generally don't release full blown reviews this far in advance. Be patient, the reviews will come.
-
Sorry for the lengthy post, guys, but this reviewer is very positive about Kong. Just thought I'd share it with you people.
This gorilla of a film is blockbuster of the year
by BAZ BAMIGBOYE, Daily Mail 09:45am 2nd December 2005
Just over a year ago, Oscar-winning film-maker Peter Jackson stood on the mammoth Skull Island set he had built on a peninsula in New Zealand and told me why he loved King Kong.
Speaking about Merian Cooper's classic 1933 movie, Jackson said: "The original Kong is a wonderful blend - probably the most perfect blend - of escapism and adventure, mystery and romance. It does everything an escapist movie should do: it takes you places you are never going to see and gives you experiences you are never going to have."
Jackson's words came back to me as I sat in the back row at the Loews Cinema complex on New York's West 68th Street this week, watching the first screening of his new version of Kong.
He may not have known it at the time, but Jackson could just as well have been talking about his own extraordinary remake of the movie that inspired him to become a director when he saw it one Friday night on TV when he was just nine years old.
The very next morning, Jackson started creating stop-motion films using Plasticine.
This time round, the director had some much bigger toys - 21st-century humdingers - to play with.
And he has made a picture I can only describe as jaw-droppingly brilliant: the most entertaining blockbuster movie this year.
But all this monkey business wouldn't amount to a hill of beans if the movie didn't have a heart, and boy, does it.
Kong's the last of his race. He has withdrawn into himself, and the occasional sacrificial native (he plays with them for a while and then tosses them away like chicken wings) is merely a distraction from the pain of his lonely life.
Then along comes beauty, in the shape of Ann Darrow, a Depression-era vaudeville performer living on the breadline, who lands a role in a madcap director's fantasy feature.
Ann, as played by Naomi Watts, is pretty weary herself. And somehow, the great ape and the lovely, lost woman recognise they are kindred spirits under the skin. Or, in his case, fur.
There's a beautiful moment with Kong sitting on top of a mountain, Ann in the palm of his hand, both watching the sunset. I actually heard one tough broad of a movie executive sobbing. Jackson evokes such a sense of empathy for his beast that Kleenex should be sold along with the popcorn.
King Kong truly is an 8,000lb gorilla of a movie. I'm still marvelling at a scene where a herd of brachiosaurus stampede as they are pursued by predators with teeth the size of carving knives.
Then, just when you think such a sequence can't be topped, Kong pounds to rescue his damsel in distress when some hungry velociraptors mistake her for a snack.
An almighty battle ensues and it's at this point Kong goes from super monster to super hero in Ann's eyes.
Jack Black, who plays preening, self-promoting movie maker Carl Denham, told me that, in the original movie, his character was older and more of a "kick-ass action hero".
"This Denham is darker," he says.
"He has an obsession with accomplishment. He's got insecurities and has this fear of not accomplishing something great before he dies.
"Fran Walsh [Jackson's life partner] told me my Denham has to have a little bit of Willy Loman from Death Of A Salesman to him. There's fear and arousal on my part. Certainly that's what Denham is feeling when he captures Kong on Skull Island."
Jack tells me all children - "at least all boys" - love King Kong.
"He is the king of all the monsters, even better than Godzilla. Kong is stronger and smarter than Godzilla, who's just a stupid, slimy lizard."
He was referring to the original Kong and the gormless 1976 remake with Jessica Lange.
But I think Jackson's version, which he wrote with Fran Walsh and Philippa Boyens (the trio also adapted The Lord Of The Rings for the screen), is accessible to all.
I don't know what the rating in the UK will be for the film - which also features Jamie Bell, Adrien Brody, Thomas Kretschmann, Kyle Chandler and Colin Hanks - when it opens in the UK on December 15. (It will have its London gala next Thursday, December 8.) But it might be a bit much for tiny tots.
As I write this, I'm getting shivers thinking of the moment when Andy Serkis - who plays a double role, but more of that later, as they say - encounters a giant insect that extends itself horribly and slurps him down head first.
It terrified me, but then I'm the guy who, years ago, ran from a Manhattan apartment I'd rented because there were cockroaches in the oven. Forget roaches - the bugs in this movie are the size of Agas.
Serkis was at the screening, along with most of the cast. The Londonbased actor told me the final version had only been wrapped up this Monday.
Andy's two roles are that of ship's cook (his speciality is porridge al la walnuts) - and Kong.
He went to Rwanda for a few weeks to study the gorillas - in particular, to observe how they moved and communicated with each other.
Jackson had Andy act out Kong's role and then digitalised it, using the same technique employed with Gollum in the Lord Of The Rings films. Richard Taylor, Jackson's long-time technical collaborator, explained: "Today, as an audience, we crave an emotional relationship, so we used Andy to drive Kong. To make him convey the toughness of this giant silverback, but also to give a sense of empathy.
"In Lord Of The Rings, we used an orange ball to denote something the actors would be acting to, and we added the special effects later. Here, we used Andy or a series of sculptures of Kong's face."
The Kong busts took a long time to make. Just punching in the 40,000 yak hairs took three-andahalf weeks for each one.
Monday will be the world premiere of King Kong, with cinemas around New York's Times Square showing the movie.
Some critics will carp about its length - three hours - but for me, the time sped by.
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.
-
Dec 02, 2005 1:19:25 PM CST
So do you think a bad review will somehow validate your pathetic
by timbenzedrine
Universal seems very optimistic about this film. If they weren't ,we would already be hearing reports about them wanting it trimmed down. I haven't heard anything beyond a couple of nitpicks from the people who have seen the preview. It's only a matter of time before the real reviews surface, But I can't help but assume that you have already chosen to hate the film regardless of the reviews. So go see it, or stay home, I don't give a shit one way or another. My guess is that this film will do just fine without you.
-
We get headlines when Kong takes a dump, but nothing when all these early reviews have come out???? :confused:
-
so we get 4-5 reports so far...all of them positive.in fact two of them say it is the blockbuster of the year. one calls it jaw droppingly brilliant yet the haters want to wait for the "real" reviews to come in? meaning the only ones they are interested in are the bad ones. fuck you guys really are pack of spineless fucking losers. long may these good reviews continue......i love to see ringbearer9 put his negative spin on it.desperate time to be a hater..especially one who has shot his mouth off about how much this film is going to fail...so far so fucking good.
eat it haters -
No offense, but that does seem kinda pathetic that you are desperatley trying to knock on these reviews, posting after every one. It's okay if you want to see it. Shit, I had a friend go to an advance screening recently and he said it was fucking jaw-dropping. And, he was a cynical prick about the previews too!
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- Whitney Houston 1963 - 2012 -- 325 total posts 322 posts
- New JUDGE DREDD post production footage pops up -- 106 total posts 106 posts
- HANNA's Saoirse Ronan to boss around seven little people -- 63 total posts 60 posts
- Does ‘SNL’ Rhyme With ‘Deschanel’?? Learn Which SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE Vet Hosts After Sexy Zooey!! -- 74 total posts 58 posts
- There's a STAR TREK video game that is going to lead into JJ's STAR TREK 2 apparently... -- 159 total posts 51 posts
- If the Behind the Scenes Pics of the Day drops her pen, pick it up, but don’t look at her legs or else it will be on your record. -- 47 total posts 41 posts
- AVENGERS enemy revealed as pink boardgame pieces... You might suffer some form of elation... SPOILERS!!! -- 161 total posts 34 posts
- To Commemorate The 3D Release Of STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, George Lucas Wants You To Know...Greedo Shoots First!! -- 488 total posts 33 posts
- Friday Brings SWEEPS DAY NINE!! Gab Here About Tonight’s FRINGE!! Plus Einstein on TIM, Wiig On PORTLANDIA, MAHER, CLONE, GIFTED, GRIMM, SPARTACUS, SUPERNATURAL, GOLD RUSH And More!! -- 121 total posts 23 posts
- Here's The Red Band Trailer For Drafthouse Films' THE FP! -- 70 total posts 20 posts