Ain't It Cool News: The best in movie, TV, DVD, and comic book news.

Derek The Deceiver to Direct KING KONG Next!!!

First by HoseheadMckenzie	Mar 30th, 2003 08:00:30 PM
I'll give them one thing, King Kong could be remade by nobody else but Peter Jackson. I just hope it doesn't really suck like it could if not handled properly.
This could be great. by sniper_cole	Mar 30th, 2003 08:03:26 PM
Nice to have it confirmed at last.
The Mighty Kong by Terry Tsugura	Mar 30th, 2003 08:04:38 PM
Jesus Christ it would be great to see a descent Kong movie, especially after those Linda Hamilton and Jessica Lange debacles. My only problem will be that they're definitely going to do CG Kong and Jackson, though remarkably talented, is no perfectionist with Cg like Speilberg or Cameron. Also something about a US treasure being shot in New Zealand erks me sum'im' awful. But it will kick ass, no doubt about it. Here's hoping he captures the the seriousness and weight of the original film. Let's keep in mind: to the first viewers of the film, Kong was ACTUALLY CLIMBING THE EMPIRE STATE BUILDING, to this day's ausidence you'll need to show alot more, and alot more realistically, to impress anyone. Good Luck, Pete
Not interested. by Hooterman	Mar 30th, 2003 08:06:25 PM
I'm sorry but I am getting tired of remakes of classic movies. Just because the movie industry has the latest technology to improve upon the old style FX does not mean that it is a good idea to do it. I will rather rent the old Kong movies than pay to see a updated remake even if it is done by Peter Jackson.
All hail Derek! by robogeek.com	Mar 30th, 2003 08:06:33 PM
This rocks so incredibly hard. I've been waiting to hear this news for _years_ -- literally! Congrats to Peter and crew. This is absolutely fantastic.
To Hooterman: Why will you not see a new remake... by Terry Tsugura	Mar 30th, 2003 08:13:26 PM
but you will watch shitty old ones like the afforementioned "Konga" and the 1976 remake? All the Kong movies were shit, with the exception of the first, because of piss poor "Man in Suit" effects, and now that we have the technology and a truly talented filmmaker (he did direct Heavenly Creatures, afterall), now you want them to stop?
ps... by Terry Tsugura	Mar 30th, 2003 08:18:51 PM
That poster with the stylistic Kong gripping Fay Wray kicks fucking ass, why don't we see THAT as the background to this sight? Also, dig those proportions on that French poster. Snakes, sharks, and giant apes all relatively the same size. Whodathunkitt?
Use John Williams's Lost World Score!!! by Drath	Mar 30th, 2003 08:29:39 PM
I'm sure they'll get good music, but the soundtrack to The Lost World, like Williams's Hook score, deserved a better movie, so just reuse it, no one will remember the inferior film. And hey, there's a Peter Pan movie being made now too. Dammit, I gotta buy Final Cut Pro and just put the scores to the movies that deserve them. It's the only way to get the right Bond song on to the beginning of Tomorrow Never Dies.
What did you just say? by K\|LLDOZER	Mar 30th, 2003 08:30:35 PM
"My only problem will be that they're definitely going to do CG Kong and Jackson, though remarkably talented, is no perfectionist with Cg like Speilberg or Cameron." Okay, you DID see the character GOLLUM in the latest installment of LOTR, correct? Cameron's never even APPROACHED that level of craftsmanship of CGI detail and animation. Jackson's going to knock this one out of the park, if he truly loves this franchise the way he says he does. I'm in line, no doubt.
Yes this might indeed be good, it's just that ...... by Jimmy Jazz	Mar 30th, 2003 08:32:34 PM
it seems so pointless. I do not see the need for a third (at least) King Kong movie. The first was sufficient. What could they possibly add to it to improve on it? I thought PJ said he wa going to do a "small, dramatic Heavenly Creatures-type movie" after LOTR. Seeing that Heavenly Creatures is by far his best, or at least most mature film (I have reserved judgement on LOTR until I have seen the thing in it's entirety) I was interested to see what he was going to do. Oh well, the guy has wanted to do Kong since for ever. I suppose we should let him get it out of his system. I do like the idea that they aren't going to update it. It should remain in the period it orginally took place in. Of course, the fact that they are going to keep it in the thirties could reinforce the redundancy of a remake. Ah well, we shall see. But if PJ is going to keep doing "Big" movies, perhaps WB can give him the Superman franchise. He seems to posess the right type of sensibility for such a project. He is also fast, cheap and reliable. Sounds perfect. Couldn't be any worse than Ratner.
HEAVENLY CREATURES is definitely Peter Jackson's... by Dolemite_fan	Mar 30th, 2003 08:38:45 PM
best film, and a masterpiece in its own right. The new KING KONG sounds like it'll be cool, but I was most happy to see that it'll stay as a period picture, and not updated to 2004, which wouldn't be as cool (see GODZILLA). Anyone who said PJ doesn't utilize cgi as well as James Cameron or Spielberg is insane, and he definitely uses it better than Lucas, however the Wachowski Bros. may have him by a nose. Oh, and the poster with Kong holding Fay Wray (the longest poster) I believe is the one that readily goes for $1,000,000 at auction. You all should read Harry's book and find out how he got his hands on that one. Oh yeah, there is one thing about this film that I am not so sure that I like, and that's the possibility that they'll try to turn it into a franchise or something, which wouldn't be cool at all. Does this mean we're closer to getting KING KONG on dvd? Goddamn it I hope so!! This is indeed cool news!!
Why it's good that Universal waited... by Petrov42	Mar 30th, 2003 08:39:07 PM
I'm really psyched for this. I'm now very glad that Universal orignally cancelled this project. Now that PJ has pulled off such a complicated and unprecendented success with LOTR, he should be getting carte blanche. After such a big success this is probably the one time in his carreer where he'll get all the money he wants and complete creative control. And Kong is the one project where no one should be second guessing or holding PJ back. He obviously has such love for the project, I can't wait to see the results where no one holds him back. Had this gone ahead back in the late 90s he would have been much more beholden to studio execs mucking about.
I'll bet anything Peter Jackson will cast Kate Winslet as Ann Da by Red Raider	Mar 30th, 2003 08:46:39 PM
...besides, who wouldn't want to see a half-naked Winslet with long blonde hair, screaming and struggling in Kong's grip?! PJ is the most talented kiwi in existence!
I hope it is real by ChickenGeorgeVII	Mar 30th, 2003 08:58:40 PM
All I can say it I hope it has some realism...like Kong flinging his shit everywhere and eventually killing man with his big virus more than stomping on them....and then they become sour........BUT IF HE HAS A LOVE INTEREST, I PRAY TO GOD IT IS KATE WINSLET SO WE CAN SEE SOME FINE FINE ASS AND SOME MONKEY LOVIN' ALL THE WAY UP IT!!!!!! GONNA BUY ME AN APE SUIT AND PUT MY TENT UP RIGHT FUCKING NOW!!!!!!!! And thus, I have started my sunday night drinking binge! - - - George, The 7th Chicken!!!!
Effects by Terry Tsugura	Mar 30th, 2003 09:01:14 PM
I feel PJ is a better filmmaker and storyteller than SS and Cameron. But his effects, though used well in the realm of the story, are not as photorealistic as those found in a film as old as Jurassic Park. LOTR is better than JP, but admit that it's effects, when compared to JP's, are plastic and bubbly, and that will not bode well for a period film. Would you really like Peter Jackson to build incredible Coen Brothers-esque period atmosphere, and then juxtapose it with soulless CGI's?
oh yeah by Terry Tsugura	Mar 30th, 2003 09:08:43 PM
You are right, Lucas' use of visual effects has become of an embarrassingly low standard. Episode 2 is a travesty, not one scene demonstarted the magic of computer technology that Lucas has long been fighting to bring to the world. Truly the Plan 9 From Outer Soace of our time
Biggest (early) April Fools ever? by RPico	Mar 30th, 2003 09:10:32 PM
Just a thought!
Bitchin... by MrCere	Mar 30th, 2003 09:15:57 PM
I hate to over use the word "bitchin" but this is bitchin. It is also obvious. Why didn't we all realize this sooner? After the LOTR movies blew up so mega-giant, it was obvious that Universal would desperately want Jackson to do work for them and just as obvious that PJ wouldn't pass on his dream project. Why didn't we all see this coming? All that talk of WWI zombie films or small "New Zealand" stories was fine talk, but THIS is bitchin and obvious. I bet New Line wishes they had a way to keep PJ busy.
Oh good, now it's tomboy beanpoles by Chingachgook	Mar 30th, 2003 09:25:58 PM
I love the way you losers even beat to death shit that isn't funny to start with. By the way, Peter Jackson will make the second real King Kong film as only he can. He's just like Lucas.... only with vision, talent and real creativity. This will work.
Stacey Snider should be cast as Ann Darrow by Bari Umenema	Mar 30th, 2003 10:05:38 PM
She's sexy hot and now that Peter is a billion dollar money machine she loves this script. Before he made Lord of the Rings she passed on the script. She didn't think it was commercial. Funny how a billion dollar profit suddenly makes you bankable for your passion project.
i screwed up,and read the script a couple months ago.... by jonnyaction	Mar 30th, 2003 10:15:55 PM
it was a fun read and this guy definately has the nads to put it up there on the big screen.i also thought the fact that he's kept it in the 30's,was wicked cool,but i wish now,i hadn't read it.takes some of the fun out ya know.it's at drews script o rama in the k section,if you just can't wait.ja
The only thing if Kong stays alive... by Dolemite_fan	Mar 30th, 2003 10:34:53 PM
is that Universal will try to turn it into a franchise, and we do not need anymore of those, no matter what.
Something is missing here by Gambit8370	Mar 30th, 2003 10:41:40 PM
MAN IN MONKEY SUIT!!!!!!!MAN IN MONKEY SUIT!!!!!!!MAN IN MONKEY SUIT!!!!!!!MAN IN MONKEY SUIT!!!!!!!MAN IN MONKEY SUIT!!!!!!!MAN IN MONKEY SUIT!!!!!!!MAN IN MONKEY SUIT!!!!!!!MAN IN MONKEY SUIT!!!!!!!MAN IN MONKEY SUIT!!!!!!!MAN IN MONKEY SUIT!!!!!!!MAN IN MONKEY SUIT!!!!!!!MAN IN MONKEY SUIT!!!!!!!MAN IN MONKEY SUIT!!!!!!!MAN IN MONKEY SUIT!!!!!!!MAN IN MONKEY SUIT!!!!!!!MAN IN MONKEY SUIT!!!!!!!MAN IN MONKEY SUIT!!!!!!!MAN IN MONKEY SUIT!!!!!!!MAN IN MONKEY SUIT!!!!!!!MAN IN MONKEY SUIT!!!!!!!MAN IN MONKEY SUIT!!!!!!!MAN IN MONKEY SUIT!!!!!!!MAN IN MONKEY SUIT!!!!!!!MAN IN MONKEY SUIT!!!!!!!MAN IN MONKEY SUIT!!!!!!!MAN IN MONKEY SUIT!!!!!!!MAN IN MONKEY SUIT!!!!!!!MAN IN MONKEY SUIT!!!!!!! Harry, you're slacking again!!!
Will PJ do a PC version of KK? by Monkeybrains	Mar 30th, 2003 10:46:54 PM
No way will they show natives running around and screaming
YOU FOOLS, THIS IS THE APRIL FOOL'S JOKE! by Toe Jam	Mar 30th, 2003 10:49:20 PM
last year, harry and co. pulled a similar joke that had to do with a prequel to jaws and involve quint's tale of the uss indianapolis. according to the report, which ultimately turned out to be aicn's april fool's joke, spielberg was going to direct it or some shit. a couple other things lead me to believe it's a hoax, including the fact that the supposed "press release" doesn't use proper writing style (i should know, i am a journalism grad and have taken a shitload of pr classes). anyway, i remember the early rumors of jackson directing a remake and i think it would be fucking awesome (even though the lotr movies have thus far been over-bloated, overrated pieces of shit). fuck you harry for joking about this.
P.J. should do a Grape Ape movie cuz we don't need another Kong, by Moriarity Report	Mar 30th, 2003 11:25:41 PM
The 1976 version was definatley an adventure film. Was it campy? Well if you think the word "campy" means fun, then yes it was. This was a far better picture than Jurassic Park was and was a decent example of the modern golden age of fantasy films (circa late 70's - early 80's). Dino was great at this kind of stuff. The man in an ape costume worked great. They would really, really have to stretch their technology to have WETA's Kong appear as realistic as this one. Yeah they did Gollum, but can they do fur? Can they do something this big, which has to carry a film? Anyway I doubt this is real, this is an April Fool's joke because this is what Harry would want most in the world and it's just too big a coincidence.
FUCK A MONKEY! by JethroBodine	Mar 30th, 2003 11:43:16 PM
I see that the NASCAR trailer park crowd has already responded to this news with terms like "This rocks so incredibly hard," and "goddamnit, this is indeed good news." Which isn't suprising considering these folks like to watch a car go around and around in circles Ad Nauseam. BINGO! Just what Universal wants. These big studios can play you children like a big base fiddle. Or rather lead you like a bunch of rats, akin to the story of the pied piper, and charm all of the money out of your wallet and leave you with what? NOTHING NEW. No new ground will be covered here, this will be just a tired old retread of a film. You've seen the story over and over and over. You say so in your talkbacks. To quote Fight Club, "This is your life and it's ending one minute at a time." Why would you want to spend another minute of it watching something that you've seen before several times over? Surely you have the be the reason for the absolute lack of creativity in Hollywood today. You wonder why you never see anything new on the screen and why you can list all of the tired remakes of Kong? Because you demand it. Yep, you heard me right you DEMAND to see that crap. By paying to see all of these miserable old reincarnations of greatness over and over again you have proven that you need never see anything new and original ever. Nothing new and edgy, nothing gloriously ground breaking. You are happy with the retreads. They can crank em out over and over and over, and you will still hand em your coveted greenbacks and be given some half assed piece of shit in trade, and what's more, you like it. Yes, you actually like it, because for good or ill, you will leave with something to talk about. Especially here on talkbacks like these. That's all you want out of your meager little lives it to be given things that you are comfortable with. You want to be able to talk about how much better Kong looked than he did back when the whole concept was groundbreaking in and of its self. Don't you yearn for something new? Wouldn't it be nice to have something come along that is truly original to glom onto? You kids spunk your Levi's at the thought of how you felt the first time you saw Blade Runner or Star Wars? Know why? It was new. The technology and much of the whole concept was new. That's dangerous ground for the studios. Because if something is new yet ill received it means they lose money. That means that studios like Universal might have to layoff a few of you working stiff types whom they have hired to slop out hot dogs at their theme parks. And we all know how much companies hate to do that (sarchasm implied). I mean look at all of the latest news in the past year and a half of all of the layoffs at AOL/TW. That's because the merger was risky and new. For good or ill we need to demand that studios take more risks like that in an effort to bring you a better product. But I can see you fuckers getting let go from that job and saying, well at least I got to work in "the industry," now let's see, I still have part of a day left, I'll go see Kong or Lethal Weapon 9. The cycle never ends. You go see that comfortable crapola, and make it easier for the studios to keep serving it up to you. I say revolt against these bad ideas and demand a change. Demand to be the first generation to see a film and think, "WOW I got to be the first to see something really amazing, transcendental even." Imagine how it felt to go to the movies in the 30's and see King Kong for the first time. It must have been great. But that generation got that experience. And we are still seeing retreads of it to this day. Why? Because it was new and amazing. Is there any movie that has come out in the last 10 years with the exception of LOTR that we can leave as a legacy? Anything that the younger generation will clamor to see a remake of? NOPE! Why? Because we are willing to pay money to see the big studios stay comfortable and rest on their laurels and give us what we've seen before time and time again. They will clone that shit over and over and over and over as long as you buy into it. I grow weary writing here. Hopefully I have given you something to think about. Perhaps not, perhaps my writing isn't very clear since I am so enraged. I'll suffice it to say that the best advice I can offer is to leave you with this quote. It comes from Jeff Goldblum
I'm afraid King Kong re-make may be the next Godzilla 1998 by FD Resurrected	Mar 30th, 2003 11:54:25 PM
Boy, Godzilla 1998 was terrible. I know Peter Jackson's a fanboy at heart and he made good movies in the past with the exception of The Frighteners which is utter shite. I'm not sure how Peter and co. will be capable to pull off making King Kong 2005 as good as King Kong 1933 (1976 King Kong does not count - it's P.O.S.). It seems King Kong might have fake-looking CG like Godzilla 1998, so why don't Peter go for Harryhausen-esque stop-motion effect work? That way it would feel a bit more realistic in a cheesy way rather than the artificial feel of obvious CGI. I have hopes King Kong re-make don't end up another Godzilla 1998. I still can't purge the terrible, utter shit quality, lame Jay Leno modelling and wholly artificial CG effect of Godzilla 1998 from memory because it was monsterously bad.
Hoping this is true ... by Knumbersix	Mar 30th, 2003 11:58:55 PM
I don't think I've ever wanted anything I've read on AICN to be true more than I do this. I fell in love with Kong when I saw it on the small screen as young child. And then was completely awed when I saw it on the big screen over 10 yrs later. I've never recovered from the travesties that were Dino's Kong and the unforgiveable "Kong Lives". Jackson's LOTR treatments have demostrated a true respect for the material, and he obviously loves Kong enough to treat him right. Plus, anyone who can make a movie like "Dead Alive" is okay by me. I can't wait!!!!
2005? Computer Grafix will be deeelicious! by imageburn13	Mar 30th, 2003 11:59:51 PM
deeeeelicious! and quite tender!
am i the only one who likes the de laurentius kong? by Toe Jam	Mar 31st, 2003 12:13:43 AM
when i was just a kid, i taped it off tv and watched it at least once a week for several years. hot damn, jessica lange was hot back in the day
THE MARTIX REMAKE STARRING HALEY JOEL OSMENT IN 2013 by JethroBodine	Mar 31st, 2003 12:18:01 AM
I'll bet you can't wait to see that one. The fucking graphics will rule!
dinos' kong was the shit!!!!! by jonnyaction	Mar 31st, 2003 12:34:01 AM
charles grodin was outlandishly over the top(even with the dead chipmunk stapled to his noggin)and yes,the daisy dukes where very hot on jessica lang.she kinda had that mary ann from gilligans' island thing going on.and don't forget jeff bidges outstanding turn.(o.k.,maybe not so much that last bit)but he was trying hard.
Dino's Kong had its points by St.Buggering	Mar 31st, 2003 12:59:52 AM
The much-heralded effects left much to be desired, unfortunately, although the facial work on Kong was quite good. Let's not even bring up the robot. However, the performances were generally good, and John Barry's score was phenomenal; one of my favorites. It has to be said, though, that Lorenzo Semple's screenplay was a sin against cinema. "You male chauvinist pig ape"? Embarrassing. I did appreciate the blatantly pro-Kong ending, however. All in all, it's not as bad as it was made out to be, but the original still kicks its puffy white ass.
KATE WINSLET ??? by canadasam	Mar 31st, 2003 01:37:38 AM
I been hearing about Peter jackson obsession with KING KONG since Hevenly Creatures and He wanted Kate Winslet as the Beauty to the beast. Which i hope his script has her in mind. There isn't a better actress who can show pure-raw emotion at the ending when kong dies. I'm sure Universal would have loved to make the film long ago but tested Peter jackson to see Universals " The Frighteners " with the blessing from Robert Zemeckis but that was a flop and universal turned their backs just like that...Now that Jackson is the hottest director right now and will earn 3 Oscars for Screenplay, Director and Best Picture in 2004 for Return of the King...Universal has the plessure of his next dream poject and they are going to promote the hell out of it...I imagine seeing the first teaser in May 2004...Universal will release is in May 2005 or go for the July 4th weekend in 2005
Thank You God by Joey Stylez	Mar 31st, 2003 01:51:11 AM
PJ is the best man for the job of re-making KING KONG. I am stoked for this. Episode III and KING KONG in 2005. Hell yeah! Did I hear some of you people say you actually LIKED the 1976 version? Hell, I like dit as a kid but saw it again as an adult and I realized just waht a big piece of shit it is. Horribly dated, shitty effects, roll-your-eyes dialouge...and it's still way better than KING KONG LIVES. Now all we need is news that James Cameron has been picked to direct the nest SUPERMAN film and we'll be all set.
The 1933 film DOESN'T EVEN HAVE A DVD YET! by KONG33	Mar 31st, 2003 02:10:11 AM
It just has a foreign rip-off quickshot. I'd love to see another Kong film, even though nothing will replace the original, be half as good and I have a feeling it will flounder in quality.
Kong again??? by DiernaSoul	Mar 31st, 2003 02:55:25 AM
Well at least we know what Peter Jackson is doing now that LOTR is finnished :P But do we need another remake of King Kong?? I loved the original and it's sequal, "Son of Kong"...I still cry at the ending whenever I see it...The 1976 remake was okonly reason I saw it was cuz Rene Auberjonois is in it, "King Kong Lives" was kinda dumb...however I did like King Kong vs Godzilla...L
Can't wait! by notageek	Mar 31st, 2003 03:16:35 AM
This is indeed fabulous news. Peter is perfect for it -- the 33 film celebrates it's 70th anniversary this year -- all is good! "NosferatuJones" you are dead on about the 76 version! It's classic in it's own way. Charles Grodin is hilarious-- " he tried to rape you honey..." Rick Baker's effects were fabulous. Great film. Yes, great. Not a masterpiece like the 33, but still great. It was mired by expectations of a full sized mechanical monkey and the shadow of the original. "JethroBodine" you are a giant kong-sized loser who sounds like someone who can't get any of their own ideas out in the world. Kong will endure long after your bile has gone crusty. And don't think for a second anyone will wade through your novel sized post in it's entirety.
All I have to say to YOU, JethroBodine, is-- by Noriko Takaya	Mar 31st, 2003 03:23:28 AM
--A-fucking-men. Mr. Jackson: A Snowcrash movie, if you please. Toppu o Nerae!
Love Live KONG! by JustinSane	Mar 31st, 2003 03:25:34 AM
My heart leapt as I read the headline. Could it be? Could good ol' PJ finally be making the long-awaited KONG remake? I love the original more than almost anything in the world (yeah, where IS the damn DVD already?), and I don't mind seeing an update of a classic as long as it's someone with vision, and Mr. Jackson has it in spades. Having been in line the first day for every PJ flick since I first laid eyes on Braindead, I'll be there extra-early for Kong. And Harry, if this IS an April Fool's joke, it's a very cruel one indeed. PJ, good luck with the big ape!
Oops, geez, I meant LONG Live Kong... by JustinSane	Mar 31st, 2003 03:28:14 AM
... was that some sort of Freudian slip? Is it okay to be an Ape-a-sexual?
"There's just something about giant apes that gets me." by Spacesheik	Mar 31st, 2003 03:29:28 AM
LMAO.
Kate Winslet as Ann Darrow and Ron Livingston as Jack Driscoll! by Cash Bailey	Mar 31st, 2003 03:39:41 AM
Argue and you're wrong!
It's set in the thirties? Hooray! by Larry_Talbot	Mar 31st, 2003 03:53:51 AM
Can't wait.
Full size PJ KONG vs. 3 T-REX statue! by notageek	Mar 31st, 2003 04:05:41 AM
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ kingkongtribute Look in the photo albums under "Jackson" and prepare to understand why this film NEEDS to be made! Incredible! Also some great Kate Winslet shots in period dress.
April Fools!!!!! by Talimon	Mar 31st, 2003 04:36:41 AM
You folks are so gullible. Anyone who has followed press releases in the past knows that this is pure bullshit. Those quotes could have sooner been pullled out of a donkeys ass. Don't fall for the hype, sons and daughters. Harry is taking you along for a nasty April Fools ride.
This would have to be one hell of a hoax... by Dolemite_fan	Mar 31st, 2003 04:58:38 AM
but, this is even up at Yahoo, see for yourself: http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/03 0330/lasu002_1.html And Christopher Lee needs to be in this movie, too, then it could in fact become the second coolest movie ever--behind KILL BILL of course.
Two things: read variety.com and is the online script real? by halconmilenario	Mar 31st, 2003 05:02:53 AM
You can see that this is the real deal on variety.com But I
Did someone say Snow Crash? by turk128	Mar 31st, 2003 05:04:33 AM
The one with a native American more kickass than Mani, pizza-delivering samurai hackers, and jail-bait roadwarriors? Hell yeah! Bring it on!!!
I've read Jackson's KONG script... by Human Tornado	Mar 31st, 2003 06:02:27 AM
... and as much as I love the guy, I can't help but notice that it's pretty much your typical monster action fare. It's not bad at all, mind you, but it's not even "THE FREIGHTENERS" good. Dino stampede is cool, but flying pitching is a bit too much. Harder to buy than a 20-meter-tall Gorilla. I trust Derek, thou. He's a fucking genius after all.
Here's hoping Jackson puts in the "Spider Sequence" lost from th by Red Raider	Mar 31st, 2003 06:39:10 AM
Nothing spells family entertainment more than a horde of giant spiders devouring screaming sailors who just survived a fall into a vast chasm! ____btw, if Kate Winslet is to play Ann Darrow, then I want full frontal nudity! C'mon! Winslet practically has it in her contract to strip for every film she's in(Holy Smoke, anyone?!!). Perhaps they can have a scene where the natives tie her up to the sacrificial alter, then strip her completely naked. Do you think an "R" rated King Kong would draw any business?
Rate My Poo by Rate My Poo	Mar 31st, 2003 07:08:12 AM
http://www.ratemypoo.com
Liver by HIPPO	Mar 31st, 2003 07:56:37 AM
I can't wait for my website to go "liver" as Harry puts it.
Why doesn't PJ do something ORIGINAL? by Atticus Finch	Mar 31st, 2003 08:06:19 AM
Following up an adaptation with a re-make, huh? I guess he is afraid of another "The Frighteners" following up LOTR.
This Movie DOES NOT need to be REMADE by Hate_Speech	Mar 31st, 2003 08:49:21 AM
Poor choice Peter Jackson. This film has never been a good film IMHO, and the 1977 remake sucked ass. I like Peter Jackson, but the story itself is crap. I'd rather see a Gamera remake than this. CRIPES MAN!
Andy Serkis to play King Kong by holidill	Mar 31st, 2003 08:55:23 AM
I just heard they are getting Andy Serkis to be the Computer Template for King Kong. He has to put on 70 punds or so, but it will still look cool. That's the April Fool's Joke, I think this is real and I think Kate Winslet would be superb.
I just keep thinking about that Simpons mikey take on King Kong. by DANZIGG	Mar 31st, 2003 09:13:14 AM
Nice move PJ but i still think the Hobbit should be the next project you do but alas.
"He understands that there are no BAD GUYS in the film, but only by rev_skarekroe	Mar 31st, 2003 09:19:23 AM
You mean bad ideas like remaking "King Kong"? sk
This scoop is on the up and up by Terry_1978	Mar 31st, 2003 09:54:16 AM
Most of the other movie sites on here that I "frequent" have the exact same story posted. I am definitely curious to see what PJ can do with this, and although Mighty Joe Young was somewhat in that arena back in '98, WETA is gonna be massively souped up tech-wise come 2005, and as realistic as Joe Young was in that Disney flick....Kong may look eerily real...not a bad thang.
...and there was much rejoicing. by Rufus_T_Firefly	Mar 31st, 2003 10:11:12 AM
Suppose it's too late to get in line? It's nice to know there will be a Yin to the Yang that will be the cinematic turd of "Episode III."
Kong should climb whatever building they decide for the World Tr by JAGUART	Mar 31st, 2003 10:14:21 AM
They've decided on a design I think. It should be straightforward to make Kong climb a replica of whatever building they plan there, it would really insure the movie's longevity and the building would be in the film before its actually completed. That would be cool!
PLEASE GOD, DON'T CAST KATE WINSLET!!! it'll make it look like T by mansep	Mar 31st, 2003 10:23:57 AM

Will we get to see the embarassing African caricatures? by allegos	Mar 31st, 2003 10:59:36 AM
Or better yet, Jackson can pull a Toho and have Japanese actors in blackface doing the "National Geographic" dance! Nothin' riles up them audiences like seein' some darkies in a canoe, rowin' up to steal them a white woman! Jesus Christ, why doesn't Jackson just remake Birth of a Nation?
Fay Wray to reprise her role as Ann Darrow! by Blanket-Man	Mar 31st, 2003 11:19:20 AM
Yes, she's still alive, and she's ready to return to Kong's paw! Kate Winslet is signed on to play Ann as a teen-ager. I can already here the lisping geeks complaining that "their eyesh aren't even the shame color!"
Dammit, why can't Jackson follow up LOTR with something ORIGINAL by Shanghai Nicky	Mar 31st, 2003 11:23:41 AM
I'm sorry, but I just can't get excited about another remake of KING KONG. Yes, the original was wonderful. Yes, the remake with Jeff Bridges and Jessica Lange sucked. No, we don't need another one. I'd have thought that the success of LOTR would have allowed Jackson to do whatever he wanted, and I'm disappointed to find that he apparently wants to remake KING KONG. My, what a hotbed of originality Hollywood is.
LOTR vs. Kong by Palhaco	Mar 31st, 2003 11:45:52 AM
Industry Killer said, "I recognize Jacksons talent and here he doesnt have any source material that I absolutely love to arbitrarily make changes to." This is just what I was thinking as I read the story. It does seem that the only thing Jackson is REALLY interested in is the ugly, evil, and grotesque (which is why he was so bored by Rivendell, Lothlorien, and Galadriel), so if he doesn't see "bad guys" in Kong, what will interest him? I guess a giant ape will suffice. The realization of Gollum was near-perfect (and had a lot of soul that wispy-Frodo and blubbering-Sam should have had), so maybe Kong will come off that well. (Peter Jackson has as much "love and respect" for Tolkien as Donald Rumsfeld has for Tommy Franks...but he loved a lot of the fantasy elements of LOTR and wanted to make his own Grand Guignol/Jerry Bruckheimer re-imagining of the story. I dislike a lot of what he did, but HATE the ignorant contempt with which he treated Gimli and the Ents.)
New generation deserves new Kong by littlewitch	Mar 31st, 2003 11:53:56 AM
I love the original and liked the remake as a youngster, but the idea of PJ remaking this is making me go APESHIT (in a good way). I was disappointed when he left this project in early 98, but thankfully he had a project that finally put his name on the map. I love LOTR and I would love to see The Hobbit directed by PJ, but I can understand wanting to get a little distance from Middle Earth for a period. Kong is a piece of American folklore. Just show anyone on the street a picture of a giant ape on the top of the Empire State building and they'll probably know who it is even if they have never seen the original. How many films can claim that level of recoginition in the history of cinema? I think every youngster should be required to see the original Kong before modern cynicism starts to work its way into their world. But realistically most of today's generation will dismiss it due to the fact its an old black and white movie with jerky animation, not realizing how much sweat and love went into creating those creatures in that world. Kong deserves to be seen on the screen again and I am excited to see what level of realism can be achieved with the modern film making technology. To Universal, don't fucking get cold feet again. You don't want to see me go APESHIT in a bad way.
logolou: thanks for putting me straight... by mansep	Mar 31st, 2003 12:44:43 PM
however, kate winslet is not remotely 'hot'. she is an accomplished actress but personally i don't like her acting style. in fact i've never enjoyed her in anything, not even heavenly creatures. she would definately put me off seeing KK in the cinema, just as leonardo dicaprio made me not want to see GONY. there are better things to do with my time and money than endure over-rated actors who i can't stand. personally though i don't think winslet'll be cast in KK anyway. the whole thing about KK being smitten with fay wray was that she was a nubile blonde, pretty much like a doll, and completely opposite to the people he was used to seeing. kate winslet would not fit the bill. someone like charlize theron would be more like it.
"What have they got in here, King Kong?" by Regis Travolta	Mar 31st, 2003 01:05:29 PM
Jeff Goldblum as Ian Malcolm 10 years ago as he drives through the massive gates of Jurassic Park. Goldblum must be in this movie! Cast him as a publicity flack for whatever company is backing the voyage to Skull Island, in fact if it's in the 1930s make it Universal studios.
Jethro, your post is an exercise in redundacy. by Aquafresh	Mar 31st, 2003 01:06:00 PM
We get it. No one's doing anything original, and all of us unenlightened fools happily wallow in it. Yup, you've got me pegged. It's nothin' but remakes for me. And it only took you about nine times to say it. You must be one hell of a writer. I'd be willing to bet that you are busily working on a screenplay that is so original, so mind shattering, so ahead of its time, so ground breaking, so....good.... so... See? I can be redundant too. Quit talking just to hear yourself talk.
Normally, I cringe whenever I hear that Hollywood is attempting by TimBenzedrine	Mar 31st, 2003 01:29:33 PM
But PJ is about about as far away from your typical Hollywood fudgepac--err, I mean film maker, that I can"t help but feel that he has what it takes to pull this one off. He has a deep respect for the original and an understanding of what made the original one of the great American adventure fatasies of all time. I'm sure Universal is approaching this property as just another monster movie to market and exploit, but I'm confident that Jackson will actually consentrate on making this a GOOD MOVIE, first and foremost.
Primate anatomy by Strawhenge	Mar 31st, 2003 02:04:29 PM
Among primates, homo sapiens boasts the largest male reproductive equipment by a substantial margin. Certainly Kong's equipment would be impressive (and potentially lethal) owing to his massive size, but proportionately speaking, it wouldn't be much to write home about. "What ever happened to Fay Wray, tha delicate, satin-draped frame..."
An anatomically correct Kong could have some unexpectedly ugly c by TimBenzedrine	Mar 31st, 2003 02:30:59 PM
Since I heard from a noted authority (O.K., it was HP) that Kong has a certain "insatible penchant" I'd rather not discuss...
so the guy with the gun goes by Hud	Mar 31st, 2003 02:42:10 PM
don't know about y'all, but what I'd like to see is "King Kong Vs. The Planet of the Apes: The Hour of Dr. Zaius." This is set in some indeterminate time in the POTA timeline. Ape World has gone to hell; the humans are mobilizing for one last triumphant push through the remaining ape defenses. Dr. Zaius decides it's time to release his doomsday weapon, a big-ass ape he's been breeding in as much secrecy as a 60-foot simian will afford. Anyway, things go grossly wrong. the big ape tries to groom Zaius and peels the hide right off him, leaving him to die in agony. Kong falls for the Statue of Liberty, buried at this point only up to her waist, and drowns trying to carry her across the sea. The apes are routed and humiliated. Man seems to carry the day, but a deranged human general, none too happy about his retirement prospects, puts on Dr. Zaius's skin and rallies the apes to a bloody revolt. The story ends in a harrowing gotterdamerung of interspecies violence, as man and ape perish together. A disturbing sign of intelligence is seen flickering in the eyes of the rodent scavengers swarming over the rot and ruin of a lost world. Fade to black. Either that or Kong can fight a giant spider.
Obie by mtoast	Mar 31st, 2003 02:45:08 PM
It would be very nice to dedicate this film to the great Willis O'Brien, the stop-motion genius who brought Kong to life the first time around. He had much tragedy in his life. And although he did receive an Oscar for Mighty Joe Young, his final years were not spent working on projects worthy of his talent and ingenuity. It would be really wonderful to see some kind of tribute to Obie in this film. He was truly a giant.
Why remake something that just isn't very compelling to begin wi by RoobyRoo	Mar 31st, 2003 03:13:01 PM
King Kong was a "monster goes wild" novelty in the thirties. The '76 remake tried to give it heart. There is nothing compelling in a movie about a giant ape who breaks stuff. If Peter Jackson has a thing for Kong fine, but it's a shame that he would squander his LOTR clout on such an inane film idea (just like we don't need another rehashed, boring Godzilla movie).
I read a draft of the script at simplyscripts.com by numberface	Mar 31st, 2003 04:33:02 PM
I don't know which stage this one was from, but I can say this: the damned thing put a lump in my throat and a tear in my eye. Judging from the screenplay, this film is going to be wonderful. Way to go Pete for not resting on your laurels.
Bruce Campbell as Carl Denham! by vinylsaurus	Mar 31st, 2003 04:36:48 PM
Sorry, someone had to say it.
This is where it all started for me... by RobinP	Mar 31st, 2003 05:01:51 PM
1968, I was eight. Our local TV channel showed King Kong. The first moster movie I ever saw, but by no means the last. Wow, what a journey. In tribute, the McFarlane "Kong" has a place of honor in my study. I never liked the DiLaurentis remake, well, come on...it WAS written by Lorenzo Semple. (Long-time talkbackers may recall my total contempt for him. In fact, I'm offering a cash bounty for someone to drag his ass through the streets of Hollywood to a place far, far away from a word processor or typewriter, where he can inflict no more damage to the art of scriptwriting.) The original though, now THAT's movie magic.
OK, I'll be consistent by WeedyMcSmokey	Mar 31st, 2003 05:08:28 PM
Oh, fuck the remake. Sure Jackson can do whatever he wants to do, and pretty much everything old is new again - just repackaged - but I've seen this movie in 3 other incarnations before and damned if I couldn't give a squirt of piss to see it again. What makes this remake better than all the other ones we collectively piss and moan about here at AICN? Nothing. Absolutely nothing.
Weedt McSmokey & others are right by Nakatomi Plaza	Mar 31st, 2003 05:18:28 PM
Well put, Weedy McSmokey, Rooby and others: KING KONG (1933) is a geek fetish object and Peter Jackson is a geek god. Put 'em together and the geeks start creaming themselves because they think a great geek movie is being made. Er, no, fellas, it's just another dumb remake. Why do Harry and so many others automatically go beserk with excitement about things like King Kong, Superman and Hulk? Someone said it was a shame that Jackson has decided to squander his newfound Hollywood clout on something that, while a potential hit, is at the end of the day a remake. And it won't have the soul and spirit of the 1933 original. Peter Jackson's Kong will just be another franchise marketing monolith, with a CGI Kong with its face all over Burger King cups. Great. Way to go, Peter.
Cast Ann Darrow by scream by Trav McGee	Mar 31st, 2003 05:21:39 PM
At the very least, it would make for a hell of a fun screen-test reel. Ah, Faye Wray, the single greatest scream recorded on a film soundtrack. I cannot watch the scene, as silly as it starts, of Denham "directing" her on the ship without getting a major chill down the back when she lets it rip. And then later, when she means it... Yayzus. Hm, Fran Walsh apparently was good enough for the Ringwraiths, maybe she'll get some dub work again. Overall, this is fanfuckingtastic news. Everyone bitching about Remake Madness, hell, this isn't so much a remake as i is PJ getting to go to Director's Fantasy Camp. He gets to fucking direct KING KONG! How many movie directors get to live out their personal professional fantasy? And how many deserve to? PJ, you've got it coming, man, and I hope you have a blast making it. (Just don't let this distract you any from that little bit of unfinished business you have coming out this December, okay?)
spiders and anatomical correctness by GypsyTRobot	Mar 31st, 2003 05:24:12 PM
So, are there any stills of the lost segment in King Kong with the giant spiders eating people? + folks, don't get all excited over King Kong's monkeyhood. Gorillas are not well endowed. (observation based on a disturbing scientist/monkey movie I had to watch for sociology class in college, for what reason I still don't know). Not going to do the math here, but King Kong's Mr. Happy would be less of a Grape Ape and more of a Mini Me.
WHO CARES!! Waste of time, talent and money. by Russman	Mar 31st, 2003 05:31:09 PM
This will flop. Universal is so desperate they'll do anything to get publicity. I'm surprised that MGM didn't dive in to pick this up. Only .9% of the population cares about King Kong. No one else gives a damn. Big monkey falls in love with some pasty blonde chick, got it, seen it, don't need it anymore. STUPID STUPID STUPID!!
Good choice Derek by B-Taste D-Alive	Mar 31st, 2003 05:38:55 PM
Kong, done by Peter Jackson, will kick ass. No question. I look forward to it, and will see it multiple times then buy the DVD. I hope that afterwards he will consider doing a zombie movie - he probably has another great one in his head, and he should make it as a gift to fans of the genre, as LOTR is a gift to fantasy cinema. He should finance it with his own money so he can work completely outside of Hollywood studio interference, and make a kick ass zombie film with great effects, humor, gore, atmosphere, and scares. Common Derek! Another Dead Alive! (But after Kong, which will rule 2005.)
NO JACKSON!! DON'T DO IT!! by CoolDan989	Mar 31st, 2003 05:54:38 PM
Remaking "King Kong" is just going too fucking far! This should be in the "Remake This!" column, Harry! Why can't filmmakers who make fluke trilogies and are out of ideas just leave classic films ALONE?
Did Godzilla teach us nothing? by King_Octopus	Mar 31st, 2003 06:36:37 PM
Godzilla died for our sins so that remakes would never be made again! Have you all forgotten!?!? He loved us unconditionally and gave himself up so that this would never need to happen! And now we blaspheme his name once again? Look into your heart ask yourself this. Godzilla's love is infinite and he will forgive us if we just open our hearts to him.
"Why Anne...I think I love you." by BlackBanana	Mar 31st, 2003 06:57:45 PM
Timeless.
"Why Anne...I think I love you." by BlackBanana	Mar 31st, 2003 07:01:17 PM
Timeless.
Onya Pete, oh and that last one-sheet..... by Paul T. Ryan	Mar 31st, 2003 07:57:01 PM
Personally can't wait to see this one. Recently in Melbourne the Astor cinema screened a retrospective of all of Jackson's pre-Heavenly Creatures films, including his hilarious mockumentary Fogotten Silver. You really got the sense of a master-in-waiting honing his craft. At the very least, it has to be better than the awful seventies version, or for that matter APE (of which I've only seen bits of in "It Came From Hollywood"). Which brings me to a small gripe. That last one-sheet is actually of APE, not Kong! If you look at the credits at the bottom it has director Paul Leder and star Joanna DeVarrona (now better known as Growing Pains mum Joanna Kerns) listed. Dino DeLaurentiis even sued the makers to carry as disclaimer "Not to be confused with King Kong"! Peace out y'all.
My favorite part of the 1976 remake.... by Red Raider	Mar 31st, 2003 08:03:19 PM
...was when Kong, after breaking free of his cage at the Petrox presentation in New York, steps on some people as he lumbers along. Cool effect! The people he steps on are actually squashed on the pavement after he steps on them! In the original King Kong, I like when Kong raids the natives village. He first grabs a native, pops him into his mouth like a jordan almond, and BITES DOWN(in close up!). Then he reaches into a hut where natives are running around. He moves his arm throughout the hut until he grabs a native, tosses him to the ground, and then SQUASHES HIM WITH HIS FOOT! But the piece de resistance in the original Kong is when a sailor is running away from an angry brontosaurus. What does this idiot do? He climbs a tree all the way to the top. What does this accomplish? Nothing, except put him at a proper "biting height!" The bronto makes lunch out of him, all while dies in a wail of high pitched screams(the kind that would make George Romero proud!). It's amazing how VIOLENT the original King Kong film is.....
WickerJoe, about MIGHTY JOE YOUNG by mtoast	Mar 31st, 2003 08:25:25 PM
You are quite right; the '98 remake of MJY was a travesty, an insult to the great talent involved in the 1949 original. I mean the original featured the whole team behind King Kong: Merian C. Cooper's story, Ernest B. Schoedsack directing, Marcel Delgado's much-improved models (he replaced Kong's rabbit fur with fur from an unborn calf!) and -- of course -- overseeing all the effects, one Mr. Willis H. O'Brien. Add to that mix, O'Brien's young apprentice -- some guy named Ray Harryhausen -- and you have a great little movie. Of course it bears more than a passing resemblance to Kong, but still a wonderful story even more beautifully-executed than its predecessor. Besides, Kong had already been very similar to O'Brien's 1925 project, THE LOST WORLD. So similar, in fact, that the studio bought up the rights to TLW before releasing KK. So there's no point in getting uppity that they went back to the well one more time. It was worth it. Disney's bullshit remake was truly pathetic. Except for Rick Baker, that is. Maybe PJ can re-remake MJY when he's done with Kong.
Yup. Peter Jackson doing Snowcrash--now THAT would be something by Sith Lord Sauron	Mar 31st, 2003 08:31:53 PM
PJ taking on Frank Miller's "Give Me Liberty" would rock the house as well--I'd love to see Martha Washington up there on the big screen, especially since her reality seems to be getting, well, more and more real every day. Lesse, what else could he do--John Brunner's Shockwave Rider and Stand on Zanzibar would make great films. Anno Dracula would be nice on the silver screen. So would Walter Jon Williams' Aristoi. Funny how I'm always hearing that there are no origional stories anymore and we can only make do with remakes of everything. Bullshit, says I. But that said, if anyone can make a movie that will knock the '30's version off of it's pedestal as the definitive King Kong, it'll be Peter Jackson.
Dam...I was hoping for the Hobbit! by morGoth	Mar 31st, 2003 09:36:59 PM
Ah well, it'll be interesting to see what he does and the script sounds promising. Heh...Ancient Lights is right...can the Simpson's King Kong re-make ever be topped?
This is going to be good. by Azlam Orlandu	Mar 31st, 2003 10:04:20 PM
I have a good feeling about this one. Those of you who say that P. Jackson is a fluke can, well to put it lightly go fuck yourselves. I'm a die hard SW fan, but I'm not arrogant enough to say that Mr. Jackson sucks or is a fluke in any way shape or form. In fact this seems like the perfect project for him. At least it won't have a trendy 90s soundtrack full of rap-rock crap. Now that's what I call fluke. "Boom! Here comes the boom! Ready or not!" Anyone who goes to see movies with that song in the commercial should just hand in your talkback ID right now cause you have no sense of taste in the first place. Just another reason why foreigners fly planes into our buildings. Cheers, -Az
This reeks of April Fools, but if not ... by Theclownhunter	Mar 31st, 2003 10:24:07 PM
BRING IT ON!!! The original KONG is my favorite all time movie! I saw it when I was 2 on the CHANNEL 9 MILLION DOLLAR MOVIE. It's my earliest memory. I still remember the view from the sofa ... tiny legs that didn't even make it to the edge of the chair, blue fuzzy PJ's with feet, and a bowl of Honey Nut Cheerios on my lap! I was fascinated with everything in the film, from the old RKO radio-beacon to the little Buckwheat- looking native kid that got pulled out of Kong's trampling-path just in the nick of time! I was obsessed with everything KONG! I built "New York" in my sandbox and battled FISHER PRICE airplanes. I would pretend my bedroom closet was the GREAT WALL (of SKULL ISLAND, not CHINA). I could tell you the name of every prehistoric beastie by the time I hit nursery school. I did like the REMAKE. I see it, in the same way, the Chris Lee DRACULA films were to the original Lugosi masterpiece ... never coming near the original, but still a good time!!! And I loved the introduction of Kong in the remake. It didn't have Max Steiner's "whoomp ... whoomp" music, but the epic scope of the sacrifice was so awesome ... especially widescreen on DVD. And, let's face it ... JESSICA LANGE WAS HOT!!! I can't see how Farrah Fawcett and Suzanne Somers got so popular at the time ... when you had Jess running around in skimpy native sacrificial garb (I hope they keep that element in Jackson's). Beauty killed the Beast alright ... the poor bastard didn't have a chance!!! I really want P.J. to push the envelope with Kong's Domain in this flick ... the ground made up of prehistoric animal bones ... a perpetual fog, that almost always places the island in a night-time limbo ... giant spiders, with the sailors ensnared in their webs! And wouldn't it be cool if Danny Elfman scored the film in the "style of Max Steiner?" He could re-use some of the original elements, but rearrange them and mix them with his new score material!!! I hope KONG looks sort of like the O'Brien/Delgado model ... only slightly more remodified, to suit the CG-stuff ... although I wished they used some polished-up DRAGONSLAYER-styled stop/go-motion techniques, that's enhanced by CGI. A little of the old mixed with the new ...
King Kong & PJ? by BDT	Mar 31st, 2003 10:50:32 PM
"Say, is this the moving picture ship?" The ship is going on a "crazy" voyage with a fearless adventure filmmaker and movie producer, who is preparing for a film expedition: "...that crazy fella that's a runnin' it....They say he ain't scared of nothing. If he wants a picture of a lion, he just goes up to him and tells him to look pleasant." April fools or not, one can only dream.
Ok, I know some think it sucked but... by Gambit8370	Mar 31st, 2003 10:50:42 PM
Can someone please tell me if, where and when I can get the 1960's "King Kong Returns" featuring Mecha-Kong on DVD??? ...I have money.
Oh yeah, and one other thing ... by Theclownhunter	Mar 31st, 2003 10:54:08 PM
Wouldn't it be cool if Peter Jackson had one of the search-party-sailors get bitten by his "zombiefying" Sumatran Rat-Monkeys from "DEAD-ALIVE?" Remember they were taken off Skull Island ("Waaaayyy West of Sumatra" ... according to the old charts ...)at the beginning of that film. Incidentally, the native-life at the beginning of that film seemed more realistic than the ones depicted in both KONG films. I'd imagine them seeming more South Pacific-looking than black! Unless a boatfull of Africans went WAAAYYY off-course a few thousand years ago and repopulated the island ...
So...uh... he's calling it "Barking Kong"? by user id indeed!	Mar 31st, 2003 11:03:11 PM
I'm still stuck on that "bar" thing. He should film it entirely in black and white. Except for the end, when the street is bathed in bright red ape blood. Beautiful, sparkling, ape blood.
My favorite part of the 1976 remake... by Nocturnaloner	Mar 31st, 2003 11:04:34 PM
was that the gelatinous red goo that poured out of the giant snake (which Kong rips in half) looks exactly like the stuff that they put into Stretch Armstrongs. That, and the Burger Chef commemorative glasses.
That was cheesy-cool ... by Theclownhunter	Mar 31st, 2003 11:08:35 PM
Actually it's called KING KONG ESCAPES ... a sequel to KING KONG VS. GODZILLA. I remember that ... HA HA HA!!! Kong is brainwashed by some James Bond-villain dude (who's dressed like Marlon Brando when he played Superman's pop). His robo-Kong breaks down, so he has to use the real one to dig for some uranium-shit that's buried up in the North Pole or something. Robo-Kong and the Real McCoy (or at least his closest Asian equivalant) duke it out on top of Tokyo Tower at the end. I don't know about a DVD, but I've seen the VHS-bootleg (widescreen) at some conventions a few years back. Hey, I'd get that!!! I like crappy monster movies from long ago ...
King Kong Escapes by Nocturnaloner	Mar 31st, 2003 11:23:20 PM
Is available on a bootleg of a Japanese dvd that you can get on some little auction site or other. No English subs though. http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISA PI.dll?ViewItem&item=331923949 1&category=2298
Michael Jeter R.I.P. by ChickenGeorgeVII	Apr 1st, 2003 01:58:15 AM
This is not the place to put this, but it seems to be where everyone is reading right now.....Michael Jeter has passed away......he was best known to me as Del, the prisoner who loved mice in "The Green Mile" and the singing bum in "The Fisher King" who gave Amanda Plummer the serenade of a lifetime.....I hope Harry puts up a page for him.....he was funny as shit and a pretty good actor too.....And thus, I am sad. - - - George, The 7th Chicken.
Story is LEGIT by notageek	Apr 1st, 2003 02:18:42 AM
Was on the front page of Variety and the Hollywood reporter, and it's all over the net. All hail the new King of Cinema -- (that would be Jackson:)
How UNoriginal! by Uroboros	Apr 1st, 2003 02:40:49 AM
Hey it's cool people love the original. Or how it made you fall in love with film making when you were 9. But that's not enough reason to remake the thing. The original was cool and all; but it still amounts to a movie about a giant ape who for some reason falls for a tiny little human female. And pays the price for it. With all the literary work that's available to make a movie out of, why King King?
Remakes are stupid, PERIOD. by Custer	Apr 1st, 2003 03:37:03 AM

This is great, awesome, mind-blowing fucking news. by a goonie	Apr 1st, 2003 04:13:26 AM
Considering my love for PJ, what with Bad Taste and Heavenly Creatures and Meet the Feebles all kicking so much ass. And then you have Braindead, which I have unfortunately only seen the censored version of. Then you have the good FOTR, which I liked but had problems with. And then you have "The Two Towers," which is for me truly one of the great movies of my lifetime, perhaps one of the greatest pictures ever. Now, his dream project is going to happen. I can't wait to see what Jackson, Walsh, and Boyens have done and will do with the script. I can't wait to see what WETA is going to do with the effects on this movie. They've proven their insane brilliance with "The Two Towers." Now I'm salivating for more. I'm just so happy to hear this is actually happening now. This is great. I know PJ has something truly special in store for us.
But will Jor-El talk Kong out of dying? by Son Of Batboy	Apr 1st, 2003 04:27:40 AM
Another pointless remake. Waste of time. Waste of money. And if they really want Kate Winslet, just change the setting to India then she'll do it. Or just offer her a double layered cheesecake. That usually works.
WHERE is the Skunk APE by Jon E Cin	Apr 1st, 2003 04:52:56 AM

"His robo-Kong breaks down, so he has to use the real one to dig by AliceInWonderlnd	Apr 1st, 2003 05:14:50 AM
Now THIS is the movie that Derek ought to make. I'd be front and centre for this, no question. But I must join the chorus of "eh" on this one. I'm happy PJ the Geek God gets to do a movie that makes him happy. But for my own sake, I see it as a wasted opportunity for something truly cool to happen in post-ROTK world. At the end of the day, a remake is a remake.
Fur by stackpointer	Apr 1st, 2003 06:23:42 AM
I have no idea how cool it is to know the feel of the fur of King Kong. I just know how cool it is to know the feel of the fur of a woman. And it is more important, hehehe.
This is great news and all but is it going to be rated NC-17? by Filthy Fox	Apr 1st, 2003 07:15:59 AM
Like all good Peter Jackson movies should.
LOTR WAS a REMAKE too -- KONG will RULE by notageek	Apr 1st, 2003 07:32:44 AM
Anyone remember a film called "The lord of the rings" playing at a theater in 1978 -- guy named Ralph Bakshi was responsible? Everyone so quick to scream "remake!" needs to take a look at how reverent Peter treats his source material. Or has everyone already forgotten two little films called "Fellowship of the ring" and "The two towers"? Ahhh, how jaded and quick to lose faith some are. I don't think you'll see Matthew Broderick taking out a brood of baby kongs with spilled gumballs in this one:)
ok, a NC17 KIng Kong is fine with me, but like I said..... by Red Raider	Apr 1st, 2003 08:04:18 AM
...if the new Kong is NC17 then I want a scene where the natives tie up Kate Winslet(or whoever ends up playing Ann Darrow...I'd prefer Winslet) to the sacrificial alter, then tear all her clothes off. Panties. Bra. Everything. Nothing would be more primal than Kong's blonde bride, nude, screaming, and struggling with the straps that hold her to the alter as Kong parts the jungle before her. The sight of a nude Ann Darrow in Kong's grip would give all new meaning to the term "beastiality". **Of course unless a director like Paul Verhoeven directs the new Kong, this will never happen! Peter Jackson is a man of class. How about the actress who plays Eowyn in TTT play Ann Darrow??
BLONDES ARE SCACE AROUND HERE! by ako	Apr 1st, 2003 08:51:24 AM
Remember that line from the orginal? he new PC version will be "Sorry no sale!" Or charlie the cook after finding the native necklace anounces, "crazy black man been here!" The new PC version will be,"My opressed black brothers have struck a blow for there racial pride!" Wasn't beauty thar killed the beast!" Will become, "Another exsample of the west's rape of the natural enviroment!"
Aw crap!!!!!!!!! No LotR:RotK SEV DVD due to King Kong! by Miami Mofo	Apr 1st, 2003 08:55:00 AM
It has now been confirmed by A.F. that due to the preproduction demands of King Kong, Peter Jackson has decided to not, repeat NOT, release a Special Extended Version DVD of LotR:RotK. This sucks!
King Kong is the sexiest tomboy beanpole on the planet. by Kauzi Sezso	Apr 1st, 2003 08:59:36 AM
Sorry, but nobody said it yet. Anyway, if PJ does remake an NC-17 version of King Kong, it should have Eliza Dushku in it. I mean, really. Think about it. Askfirefly out.
re: askfirefly ....good choice! by Red Raider	Apr 1st, 2003 10:02:57 AM
However, if the new KK was NC17, and if they had a scene where Ann Darrow is stripped of her clothes, wouldn't it be obvious(yet sweet!) that Eliza Dushku is not a natural blonde?!!!!
Once more, with less hyperbole by allegos	Apr 1st, 2003 10:19:22 AM
I assume the Talkbacker who suggested I was griping about the portrayal of Africans as "fishermen" was being deliberately obtuse. While my tone was more emotional than it needed to be, I'm not imagining the overtones in Cooper's film when the savages row up and abduct the blonde ingenue in the dark of night, bent on making her the bride of the overgrown gorilla they worship. The 1976 version is even more overt; Jeff Bridges asks Jessica Lange how she can feel sorry for Kong, after "that animal raped you!" Cooper was making a 1930's film for a 1930's audience, and he was pandering to their fear of emancipated black men to put a scare in them. "King Kong" stands as a snapshot of the time in which it was filmed. A modern remake won't have that excuse. I'm willing to stand corrected; it's possible Jackson can remake "Kong" without turning it into a recruiting film for the Ku Klux Klan, in which case it'll be a very different film from the original. If he does, I'll be happy to eat a Harry-sized portion of crow right here on Talkback. If he doesn't, the movie will deserve to bomb. If the "white woman imperiled by Hottentots" genre was still viable in the theatres, "Tears of the Sun" would be in its fourth week at #1 now.
IF THIS IS AN APRIL FOOL'S GAG, THEN USA TODAY IS IN ON IT, TOO by slone13	Apr 1st, 2003 10:55:39 AM
Um....yeah....that's all I got to say. Cover of USA Today's LIFE section has the same story...
Glad It'll Be In 30's, It's Hard To Believe A Secret Island Of R by The Founder	Apr 1st, 2003 01:24:21 PM
I don't really like period pieces, but this is more believable, especially with todays technology, the world is to small where their can actually be a secret or never before discovered island. KONG WILL RULE!!!!
What happened to Peter Jackson by Steal_Dragon	Apr 1st, 2003 01:56:41 PM

I wonder if King Kong will be as Gay as Frodo? by GornPirate	Apr 1st, 2003 02:47:08 PM
Watch out for King Kong's Ding Dong!
Did someone ask for KONG spiders? by m2298	Apr 1st, 2003 03:06:01 PM
www2.netdoor.com/~campbab/kong /spider.jpg
Say Hey to Red Raider! by Kauzi Sezso	Apr 1st, 2003 03:11:14 PM
Sure it would be obvious that Eliza Dushku is not a natural blonde. But that wouldn't be my first thought....
Kong Screenplay Link by neo_nemo78	Apr 1st, 2003 03:26:45 PM
For the sake of informed discussion, with the knowledge that it's just a first draft, one can find Jackson's King Kong script here: http://tbhl.theonering.net/fil ms/king_kong_script.html
allegos... by mtoast	Apr 1st, 2003 04:02:03 PM
I think we can assume that it will be a "very different" film -- especially in the areas you point out. I think the heart of the original was the pathos around Kong -- the tragedy of his fate. I think that many of the other details of the story can be changed while preserving that sense of Kong as a victim of circumstance (and stupid white men). There's no doubt that if Jackson's version portrays a civilization on that island, it will look and act much differently than the one seen in the 1933 version. And its relationship to the explorers/invaders will be a very different one. I think that they can make a "very different" film in this regard without sacrificing the essence of the original. I sure hope so anyway.
Bendy Beckham by no_bifocals	Apr 1st, 2003 05:26:27 PM
How do you think we should play the Turks? Maybe drop Heskey and bring in Rooney?
If PJ really wants to honor the original KK by Darth Brooks	Apr 1st, 2003 06:30:54 PM
...he'd better make "The Most Dangerous Game" as a quickie in the middle of shooting, with the same cast. The original worked out okay for RKO.
In 2005, Star Wars: Episode III, will get its ass kicked by King by KAWS	Apr 1st, 2003 08:22:56 PM
First, it received a royal ass kicking by Spider-Man in 2002, now, it will receive a gigantic ass kicking by King Kong in 2005. You know this to be true. Just accept it and move on.
Rick Baker worked on Jackson's FRIGHTENERS. He would do right by by Monkey_King	Apr 1st, 2003 08:50:37 PM
You know someone had to say this.
KONGA LINE by TomVee	Apr 1st, 2003 09:31:13 PM
A KING KONG remake is poorly timed. A bad smell lingers from the recent GODZILLA remake, not to mention the truly stinky 1976 remake of KONG. Jessica Lange was the best part of the 1976 remake. She was hot indeed. She had a quality about her that is rare in today's nubile young actresses, except maybe for Uma Thurman. Jeff Bridges was slumming throughout. His hair gave a better performance.
racist? by brucebridges	Apr 1st, 2003 11:22:14 PM
Can anybody explain to me why Michael Clarke Duncan playing an ape is racist? I don't get it.
BARrishniCough!!! by Jack Ryder	Apr 2nd, 2003 02:02:26 AM
you know, the dancer. "Peter first wrote me about KING KONG within weeks of my website going liver for the first time." you're site went LIVER? "I can tell you this, Peter was quite fond of LORD OF THE RINGS before he made it... I'd say while making it, he's really come to love it whole-heartedly... But KING KONG... That's Peter's passion." so you're saying it was easier to sell a 3 pic. LotR deal than a remake? and he took on this Herculean task BEFORE doing the movie he REALLY wanted to make?
Is Kate Winslet an excellent screamer...? by Red Raider	Apr 2nd, 2003 07:21:44 AM
I hope so! http://www.cnn.com/2003/SHOWBI Z/Movies/03/31/king.kong.ap/in dex.html
Winslet is too powerful. She would crush the ape. by DufusyteII	Apr 2nd, 2003 04:05:13 PM
The maiden in distress is supposed to be vulnerable and distressed. Winslet is never in distress because she is such a powerful person. In a match-up between her and the ape, I would fear for the ape. Anne has to be weak and vulnerable. If Winslet is associated with the project at all, I would cast her not as Anne but as Kong. ******* Miranda Otto has been doing an excellent job of being a vulnerable "maiden in distress" in TTT, and she captures the sympathies of the audience. She would make a great Anne, if they can make her look young.
King Kong plays ping pong with his ding dong in Hong Kong by Harry The Hutt	Apr 2nd, 2003 05:20:18 PM
Maybe we'll see that in the film.
Kate Winslet? Yes, Please! by Movietool	Apr 2nd, 2003 05:27:04 PM
Inspired casting. She's perfect. And hot. And one of the few actress in movies today who hasn't starved herself into looking like a young boy (Courtney Cox, Jennifer Aniston, Gwyneth Paltrow Jennifer Garner, Renee Zelwegger, Jennifer Connelly - please eat something). Good God, I don't understand where some of you freaks get the balls to call her overweight. I've been to the conventions. I know what you greasy fat fucks look like.
AICN was first on the re-emergence of PJ's Kong? by RichardHellFan	Apr 2nd, 2003 06:43:46 PM
The One Ring shows the first major recent news that PJ was going to go back to Kong was last June. http://www.theonering.net/perl /newsview/1/1025309060
could someone pls confirm or deny the persistent rumour that.... by jackburtonlives	Apr 3rd, 2003 12:08:05 AM
john rhyses davies is playing Kong's face?
This movie needs a giant killer plant!!!! by Nice Marmot	Apr 3rd, 2003 11:19:56 AM
W/ long ass tendrils & a big gaping mouth. Feel free to add Little Shop of Horror jokes. . .
FUCK KING KING! by Skylord2	Apr 3rd, 2003 03:49:49 PM
If Hollywood wants to do a BIG BEASTIE movie, they should do MEG! I'd rather see a 70' Great White Shark tear up the East Coast (and surfers in Hawaii) rather than watch yet another incarnation of King Kong. C'mon! Even MIGHTY JOE YOUNG wasn't that good. A CGI Kong will SUCK! At least with Meg, you have franchise capabilities! TRENCH could come out two years after Meg and BOOM! You're in the money! Please, PTB in H'wood, make MEG! WE NEED SHARKS!

Talkbacks

Derek The Deceiver to Direct KING KONG Next!!!

User login

Quick Talkback

Talkbacks