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

Quint interviews DVD Producer Michael Pellerin about the KONG EE and the upcoming LOTR Box Set!!

Damn you Michael Bay by MCMLXXVI	Nov 14th, 2006 05:48:12 AM
Damn you Michael Bay
WELL by THE KNIGHT	Nov 14th, 2006 05:49:16 AM
hardy har har har... Kong baby...!
WELL by THE KNIGHT	Nov 14th, 2006 05:50:37 AM
I really want to get some Peter Jackson dvds, but i really don't feel like seeing another version six months later... anyone with me here?
I feel that Jackson really screwed up this by emeraldboy	Nov 14th, 2006 06:09:38 AM
movie by re-structuring the narrative of the original screenplay and adding characters that were there for no understandable reason as well as changing the characters of Cal Denham and Jack Driscoll and going bact to jurassic park didnt really help either. been there seen that bought the tee-shirt. I have no interest in seeing this movie again.
How long... 'til all the "Too Long" hilarity starts? by half vader	Nov 14th, 2006 06:12:21 AM
Not long, I'll bet.
I'll wait for the HD LOTR.... by Abin Sur	Nov 14th, 2006 06:40:58 AM
You can only watch so many hours of hobbit feet being attached...
Jimmy and Hayes should've been cut by Mattapooh	Nov 14th, 2006 06:46:56 AM
Why a talented, successful director like Jackson would decide himself to leave that in is beyond me, let alone why the studio didn't say "Peter, it doesn't work, cut it". Sometimes a filmmaker can have too much control and things get wonky. Really though, those sequences added NOTHING to the film aside from length and audience groans. Also, the spider pit sequence was creepy :(
Too soon........ by NachoNegro	Nov 14th, 2006 06:58:59 AM
I respect what he's saying about wanting not to duplicate the extra material etc - but there's nothing that's going to make me buy these again outside of a HD-DVD / Blueray release for the extended versions. I fully understand the economics of it - but that doesn't mean I'm going to buy them again without a good reason. And to be frank, I haven't seen all of the extras on the discs I've got.
Thanks, Peter Jackson by Franklin T Marmoset	Nov 14th, 2006 07:00:32 AM
This Peter Jackson certainly knows how to spin out these films onto as many discs as possible. Who knew a fun little film like King Kong would one day become a triple disctacular megajumbo pack with bonus lump of plastic? Not to mention the inevitable 'Ha! I finally got what I wanted!' quadruple disctastic ultra version in genuine gorilla fur slipcase. That's some pretty impressive stuff there, Mr Jackson.
I'm growing fonder of Kong... by Boba Fat	Nov 14th, 2006 07:08:26 AM
over time and really looking forward to the extended cut. A bit of distance and no hype helps this film a lot.
I wonder did Peter Jackson make have a 15hr print by emeraldboy	Nov 14th, 2006 07:09:30 AM
of the Lord of the rings Trilogy? i only ask cause someone somewhere keeps deciding we want these things. The 200 euro SE was enough. That came after the directors cut. We we all shout stop maybe someone will listen. In an interesting aside since these films were released in Ireland a row has erupted between EFD(entertainment film distributors) and ward anderson who own half of Irelands Cinema companies and some cinemas in the UK. Anyhoo, EFD, a london based company control the distribution rites to New line films in the UK and Ireland. As well as dvd Distribution rites also. It remains to be seen if this Deluxe lord of the rings DVD will be available in Ireland.
BringingSexyBack by Boba Fat	Nov 14th, 2006 07:11:28 AM
King Dong is another film altogether. Not extended or cut to my knowledge
I wonder did Peter Jackson make have a 15hr print by emeraldboy	Nov 14th, 2006 07:11:43 AM
of the Lord of the rings Trilogy? i only ask cause someone somewhere keeps deciding we want these things. The 200 euro SE was enough. That came after the directors cut. IF We we all shout stop maybe someone will listen. In an interesting aside since these films were released in Ireland a row has erupted between EFD(entertainment film distributors) and ward anderson who own half of Irelands Cinema companies and some cinemas in the UK. Anyhoo, EFD, a london based company control the distribution rites to New line films in the UK and Ireland. As well as dvd Distribution rites also. It remains to be seen if this Deluxe lord of the rings DVD will be available in Ireland.
So.... by BanAllFIRSTPosters	Nov 14th, 2006 07:15:34 AM
What's left to put on the LOTR trilogy? I have the EEDVD's and really feel like this triple dip they're doing is a screw job for the fans.
If KK aint 4 hours long, then why call it extended? by triplefive	Nov 14th, 2006 07:41:53 AM
Where's my 12-disc, 92 hour version of King Kong and The Masters of the Universe vs. MechaKong?
the "too long hilarity" begins here by omarthesnake	Nov 14th, 2006 07:48:30 AM
PJ's Kong was too damned long. There wasn't a single sequence that couldn't have been trimmed by about a third. The pit of monsters sequence, the dinosaur stampede, Kong's romantic ice skating escapades... every one of them was numbingly long and took away from the flow of the film. It was a lovely piece of work, but it sure doesnt need to be longer!
King Kong is too long! by Franklin T Marmoset	Nov 14th, 2006 08:06:45 AM
No one uses full names anymore, Mr Kong. Can I suggest K.Ko instead?
MCMLXXVI IS A WANKER by Seph_J	Nov 14th, 2006 08:15:46 AM
MCMLXXVI IS A WANKER
More bloated than Dom Deloise's Lower Haunches. Blech! by Behemoth	Nov 14th, 2006 08:17:45 AM
We really need a THEATRICAL RELEASE of ANOTHER LOTR documentary??? Good lord, man, leave LOTR be and put the energy into making The Hobbit. The self-indulgence of these bloated DVDs is really getting a bit sickening. In the case of LOTR, it starts to detract from the film itself after awhile. Move on, Mr. Jackson! Move on!
I think my head just blew up! by Talkbacker with no name	Nov 14th, 2006 08:20:32 AM
I want this NOW! Love or hate the movie, nobody does a dvd like Peter Jackson! ...for the record I love KONG with all my heart.
Look guys! The studio will put out LOTR DVD's anyway... by Talkbacker with no name	Nov 14th, 2006 08:46:33 AM
SO Peter might as well get in there and give us something that is at least worth it. It's either that or it's crappy run of the mill DVD releases. You don't want it, don't buy it. that's the only way the studios will stop doing thing slike this. I thank Peter for at least caring that we don't get ripped off.
If they insist by Leopold Scotch	Nov 14th, 2006 08:50:19 AM
on releasing more LOTR DVDs with even more footage, they should cut it like a mini-series box-set. With hour-long "episodes", it would make more sense and be more accessible: like watching the 24 and Lost DVDs. One volume can stretch over one or two weeks and lots of cool stuff could be included. Altering the format of the movies would make them a bit more fresh. Plus, I must see a gag reel.
Sweet! You know what this means? by Mr. Nice Gaius	Nov 14th, 2006 09:41:40 AM
More Ringw(b)earer9 insanity! Bring it on, Ringodoodle!
so Quint are you guys being paid for this by mikey mike	Nov 14th, 2006 09:46:36 AM
all the shameless advertising that you guys are doing I mean. you had Jackson do what was essentially a sales pitch when the first DVD came out and now you're sorta doing the same. I hope you guys are getting some nice cash from Universal for all this promotion
"it's a bit indulgent" by robogeek.com	Nov 14th, 2006 10:18:46 AM
Thankfully so. ;-)
Less is more by SkeletonParty	Nov 14th, 2006 10:48:26 AM
I watched K.Ko. again without the hype and I noticed that I only cared about K.Ko. Lumpy and Naomi Watts....and I have to skip the ice skating scene altogether. K.Ko. is one of those movies that I find myself editing as I go, like I do with all of the new Star Wars movies. "Cut that, trim that, delete that, change that, kill whoever thought of that..." I would love a DVD that allowed you to edit the movie into something enjoyable.
Okay guys, don't EVER bitch about Lucas again! by moto	Nov 14th, 2006 10:58:29 AM
I don't want to hear one more complaint about George Lucas releasing DVDs. Not one. This is frickin' ridiculous. At least Lucas waits between releases and lets us enjoy what we bought for awhile and anticipate more. Jackson releases way too many versions in a short period of time. It's getting old. Yeah, he can blame the studio and say that, "I'm looking out for the fans..." but he really could help us out and tell the studio he won't contribute to these multiple releases in such a short time span. The studios would release bare bones editions and they woud see that sales would be horrible without his involvement. I like Jackson, but these Rings movies are becoming a bit too much. Do we really need to know that much about the movies?
There's a difference here, moto by Vi	Nov 14th, 2006 11:18:09 AM
Lucas has almost complete control over his property. LOtR is not Jackson's property.
Here's an idea - too late - done it. by The Reef	Nov 14th, 2006 11:34:59 AM
I stopped reading the talkback and went out and spent some dough. I hadn't bought any of the KKDVDs before because this site let slip that the EE was on its way. So can I just say, wait for what you want rather than spending dough on the pre-EE stuff and then bitching about it here when you realise what you've done. Hail PJ!
moto is right by CTU Mole	Nov 14th, 2006 11:55:24 AM
Lucas doesn't have any more control over distribution than Peter. 20th Century Fox releases the Star Wars DVDs. The only difference is that Lucas made two versions of the original trilogy. He didn't make 30 different cuts of it, one where Vader dies and one where they just don't mention him again, etc.
Peter Jackson´s King Kong could have been a great movie by MasterKenobi	Nov 14th, 2006 12:24:39 PM
If he hadn´t added all those needless characters. Most of the action was great, Naomi Watts with Kong was brilliant. And Quint even says he can´t understand why the raft scene wasn´t in the film. Instead of Hayes-Jimmy love story Jackson should have fleshed out the Ann-Jack love story, it didn´t even seem like a love story anymore, and added more action and more kong. It´s too late now. Mr Jackson had the chance to do something really great with this new dvd, by cutting a more to the point version - adding only raft scene and at the same time cutting away all the "Heart of darkness" bullshit between Jimmy-Hayes and Hayes saying, "I found him in the cages, he was wilder than the animals..." or whatever shit he was saying. I´ll somehow see the extended version for the raft sequence, but I won´t fucking pay for it. There you have it Universal and Jackson. Sue me!
SkeletonParty by MasterKenobi	Nov 14th, 2006 12:28:58 PM
That was good: "Cut that, trim that, delete that, change that, kill whoever thought of that..." Exactly my feelings about Kong. The whole fucking film could have been 2 hours, maximum 2,5 hours and it would have told a much better story.
Good work Quint... as always by Darth Thoth	Nov 14th, 2006 12:33:28 PM
PJ is the man. You can tell he's a real dude if you know what I mean. I have mad respect for him. And Michael Pellerin is really at the top of his craft. I was a little disappointed with King Kong '05 theatrical. But I plan on picking this disc up and checking out what I expect to be pure excellence.
Let me rephrase... by Darth Thoth	Nov 14th, 2006 12:37:41 PM
I was terribly disappointed with KK '05 and I'm hoping this extended cut improves the film. I trust Peter Jackson so I'm going to give this one a spin.
Moooo -- Mooooo. by veritasses	Nov 14th, 2006 01:43:25 PM
Looks like it's milking time on the Hollywood dairy farm again. I'll wait for the super extend special edition HD redux version with the lost footage of the making of PJ's birthday bloopers.
the studios are going to release these dvds by slappy jones	Nov 14th, 2006 01:49:41 PM
with or withour jackson. so isn't better that he is involved in them to make sure we are getting good stuff?jackson has no say over what New Line want to do with LOTR dvds...i'm glad he gets involved in them myself. and they always let peopel know well in advance that there are going to be further releases. the extended LOTR sets were not a secret. plus if you don't want to buy something then don't buy it.it is as simple as that. Why does everyone act like it is such a crime for studios to try and make money?? try and find a film that hasn't double dipped on dvd...every week something comes out that I have already and sure it pisses me off but fuck it...thats what the studios do. make money.look it sucks but thats all the studios want...money and this is how they make it. I just don't know why everyone blames lucas and jackson.
I'm just hoping the extra footage exists... by NNNOOO!!!	Nov 14th, 2006 02:08:15 PM
...to reconstruct something resembling the original film. Drop the vaudeville prologue, drop "Heart of Darkness", drop the ice-skating. Gimme Ann's screen test-- after all, it was in the damn trailer.
I think I found a t shirt that sums it up... by SkeletonParty	Nov 14th, 2006 03:49:09 PM
http://tinyurl.com/yfe3dq
Damn you MCMLXXVI by kwisatzhaderach	Nov 14th, 2006 05:13:52 PM
Damn you MCMLXXVI
Extended Cut by Cobbio	Nov 14th, 2006 05:14:33 PM
Thanks for the interview, Quinty. Good to hear about the nuts and bolts of PJ's production, even if I didn't enjoy Kong nearly as much as the LOTR films. My problem stems from the fact I just don't care that much about apes. I don't find them cute or cuddly or intriguing in any way, especially in the lead role in a film, so my interest level was already lowered before I went to see the film. That said, I do enjoy behind the scenes WETA stuff, production diaries, and actor testimonials. Especially from Jack Black. I'll probably pick up this version of the film for these things. By the way, what is Jackson's next project? I've heard conflicting reports and read about failed Microsoft deals. But that's it. Does anyone know?
Make it an hour longer by winebot	Nov 14th, 2006 07:15:26 PM
Keep the "Heart of Darkness" bit, keep the ice-skating, keep the vaudeville bits--keep everything. The whole thing was perfect. I never thought I'd say this, but this film was the first of it's type where I thought to myself "Even Speilberg could not have done better". The action sequences set a new standard for pacing and choreography, the music was hertfelt and powerful, and the characters(primarily Kong) and the motives and emotions behind their actions have not been this well balanced with action and suspense since "Jaws". A truly wonderful film that may need some time, during which truly bloated, indulgent and unentertaining movies can be released and remind some people what a great thing we had with Kong.
Interesting idea, BSB. by Mr. Nice Gaius	Nov 14th, 2006 07:25:51 PM
But it will never happen. After reading some of Lucas's statements when he was asked about LOTR, it was obvious that he felt outshined and embarrassed by Jackson's deft handling of the story, effects, and direction. I believe he said that it was clear that Jackson really cared about the story first and foremost. When asked about ROTK, he basically said he could not have pulled it off. Lucas is a lot of things, but one thing he is not is a good communicator or collaborator. Anybody read CHUD's interview with Darabont regarding the script for "Indy 4"?! WOW. Talk about being an asshole. Not even Spielberg could rescue that debacle. *** Hey BSB - what's up with Phategod2 calling you BBCB in the Spidey TB? You guys need to get your story straight ASAP. ;)
Peter Jackson made three fundamental mistakes: by one9deuce	Nov 14th, 2006 10:10:26 PM
1) He designed King Kong to look like a gorilla. King Kong isn't a gorilla, he is a totally unique entity. If you see a picture of King Kong, no matter what scale or backround, you should know that it's Kong. Not just a large gorilla. KONG IS COMPLETELY UNIQUE LOOKING IN THE ORIGINAL FILM. 2) The running time. I love long epics, but this story ultimately works better as a tightly paced and fast moving adventure movie. THE ORIGINAL'S RUNNING TIME IS 84 MINUTES. 3) Making Kong sympathetic to the audience. Peter's biggest mistake, and the one that sunk the film's box-office more than anything. His film is depressing. The scene in the film that illustrates this best is after Kong breaks through the door to the village. In the 1933 film the audience is supposed to be scared for the humans as Kong rampages toward the beach. In the 2005 film the audience is supposed to be feeling sorry for Kong in the same scene. Big difference. KING KONG IS A MONSTER THAT ANN IS TERRIFIED OF IN THE ORIGINAL FILM. Peter Jackson departed from three of the biggest things that make the original a classic, which is why his film will never attain that status.
Correction above by one9deuce	Nov 14th, 2006 10:23:28 PM
104 minutes not 84 minutes, DER.
Kong - an atrocity by Neutron	Nov 14th, 2006 11:17:26 PM
I just saw Kong for the first time and I have to say it was embarassingly bad. Even the FX weren't up to snuff with some very obvious greenscreen shots. And who knew you could run for 3 or 4 minutes underneath stampeding brontosauruses (brontosauri?) and not get squashed, or that a running man can body-check a raptor out of the way? Watching Ann do her vaudeville routine for Kong was cringe-inducing, and the Hayes-Jimmy book club/gay porn storyline was amateurish and unnecessary. Talk about tacked-on. I enjoyed the LOTR extras on the regular and EE versions, but the less said about Kong, by Jackson, the crew or anybody else, the better.
BSB that suggestion is actually brilliant... by NoHubris	Nov 14th, 2006 11:37:39 PM
...and VERY inspired. Kudos, sir.
gay porn by winebot	Nov 15th, 2006 03:47:44 AM
I'm a little amused that so many of you have assigned a homoerotic subtext to the Jimmy/Hayes relationship. It was so clearly nothing of the sort, and leads me to believe that some of you may be longing to see a young blonde kid get buggered by an older black man. A very strange observation about this film that, oddly enough, neither I nor anyone I know thought of until I started reading this talkback. And to one9deuce: The thing that made the original Kong look so different wasn't because the director wanted it to look like no other gorilla, it's because the creators knew very little about primate behavior, and clearly never consulted an expert. I wish people would stop romanticizing every bad special effect from way back when in an attempt to sound authoritative. Though ground breaking for it's time, it simply looks quaint today. Along with the Upright-walking, stop-motion dinosaurs, the giant ants in "Them!", and the creatures from "Clash of the Titans".
Glad I waited ... by Mace Tofu	Nov 15th, 2006 04:23:39 AM
but still do you think they will put out a set with all the production diaries, both cuts of the feature and all the extras ? Because I would still have to go back and buy two other DVDs to get everything that is not in this new 3 disc set. I almost picked it up today at Target for $25 but wanted to check online first to see what was in this one. Boy was I glad to find this up : ) Thanks. The New KKEE DVDs come in a thick clear plastic case that feels cheap and looks you could fit 6 disc in it so what is up with the "only room for 3 disc"? Should I wait for the 7 disc boxset? speaking of crazy boxsets those Bond sets are killing me with their choice of titles your forced to buy lol Damn Studios!
Still holding out for... by The Brewhammer	Nov 15th, 2006 04:27:12 AM
A much shorter than theatrical release Editor's Cut.
It just isn't enough. by dundundles	Nov 15th, 2006 05:43:07 AM
I just burned through these discs last night, and while I still havn't watched the extended cut, or the commentary, I am very dissapointed with this set. There seems to be a weatlh of information, and their really is. But... Everything in the 3+ hour documentary that makes up disc 3, is centered around design. Art design, sculpting, minitures, and ultimatly computer design. This is fine and all but how can you not even mention such very important things, such as editing, scoring, sound efects. And for Michael to say this is everything... that they threw in everything and the kitchen sink, it is just plain wrong... Unless they didn't cover these aspects of production. And there wasn't even anything on the adapting process. How did they come to the decisions they came too, to make the film so bloody long? They never defended why they had such a long theatrical cut. These are the things that really keep this set from being great. And the packiging is so lame. So cheap. Damn you universal.
Settle down Beavis/Winebot, and Dundundles by half vader	Nov 15th, 2006 06:48:33 AM
"I'm a little amused", "homoerotic subtext" etc. Dude, you sound like a prat with no sense of humour. "I find it encumbent upon me to point out the failings and scatalogical obsessions, toilet humour and other childish tomfoolery of my fellow talkbackers does not reflext on civilised society at large". And here I am thinking for once the TB was having a bit of stupid fun and not letting the usual hate overwhelm a Kong talkback! Silly me. Jimmy DOES fucking suck though. Not only that but what's-his-name Billy Elliot guy the actor was the same whiney tool in real life through the whole shoot! Poor guy, earning good money to moan like he'd be doing in his own damn house. Bah. Hayes was fine I thought, with what he had! Oh, and while I'm with you on 9deuce's silly ramblings, I agree to disagree about Medusa from lash of the Titans. She's still fantastic. Harry Hamlin in abad wig and toga is quaint. God I hope it was a wig anyway!_____________ Dunny, why don't you read the 96 script (to understand the adaptation process) and listen to the commentary first before you rush to post then? Personally I thought the editing and especially sound and mixing was covered really well in the production and postproduction diaries. Subjective, I guess.
'reflext' by half vader	Nov 15th, 2006 06:53:39 AM
Ha ha. It's like Dunny saying 'packiging'! I was going write "coming off like" rather than "sound like" but that would have been homoerotic subtext creeping in again I guess. Whee! I'm rambling and really should go to bed. Nobody's reading at this hour anyway.
I have some interesting news... by emeraldboy	Nov 15th, 2006 11:06:53 AM
MGM is in talks with Peter Jackson to make two, thats right two Hobbit movies. One will be a film based on the book and the other will be a film based on source notes taken from lord of the Rings. So says MGM's Harry Sloan. But I have some bad for the people in Ireland who visit this site. The Owners of the savoy Cinemas, IMc, Cineplex and omniplex and screen cinemas ie ward anderson and entertainment film distibutors who own the distribution rites for UK and Ireland are locked in a row, which has been ongoing for the 15 months(it looks likely to continue) they also hold the dvd rites too. Hopefully it will be over by the time this these films are made. Who knows?
"lash of the Titans" by DocPazuzu	Nov 15th, 2006 02:25:07 PM
I'd buy that for a dollar.
winebot by one9deuce	Nov 15th, 2006 03:09:54 PM
Why would Merian C. Cooper and Ernest B. Schoedsack consult a "primate expert" when they had been in the jungles of Africa themselves? They didn't want Kong to walk with his hands like a real gorilla, they wanted him bipedal. He wasn't supposed to look just like a gorilla, he was supposed to look like nothing anyone had ever seen. That's the whole idea!
ONE9DEUCE by winebot	Nov 15th, 2006 03:38:19 PM
That may well be, but honestly, do you think that such disregard for realism would have been a wise choice for the new Kong? And just for the record the new Kong didn't look like just any other gorilla. First of all, he looked old and battered, with a broken jaw and exposed tooth, to say nothing of the fact that he was 25 feet tall. To make a gorilla bipedal doesn't make it look like a different species, it just makes him look unrealistic. The mere size of Kong alone implies his incredible uniqueness, and the attention to realism makes this otherwise unrealistic idea seem actually plausible. Just like in Jaws. A 25-foot White shark? Never. But if Speilberg had also given it the ability to fly, it would have strained credibility.
winebot, I see what you're saying by one9deuce	Nov 15th, 2006 08:09:22 PM
but Jaws is supposed to be a Great White (and they can get quite big, up to 20+ feet), but King Kong is completely unique in the world. The original gives you that feeling. Only the size of Kong in the 2005 version does. I think the word that would illustrate what I am saying best is iconic. He should have been unique looking, that wouldn't take away from him looking realistic. The xenomorphs in Aliens don't look like anything on earth, but they sure are believable.
But Kong was too long anyway!!? by Avon	Nov 24th, 2006 03:29:31 PM
Don't get me wrong, it was enjoyable but too long. And now it's padded with more stuff. This should be a TV mini-series, not a movie.

Talkbacks

Quint interviews DVD Producer Michael Pellerin about the KONG EE and the upcoming LOTR Box Set!!

User login

Quick Talkback

Talkbacks