Well, I want character development with actual CHARACTERS. Not some old guy hitting on a hot girl. That's not "fatherly." Well... for some people it is (sadly). My movie would have no characters except for a few humans just there to be killed.

I want a script by Monday.

Can you show the finished product?

Promise you won't steal any idea's? This is first draft by the way, there will be rewrites.

I have no plans on writing any Hollywood scripts in the future.

I could have swore it was a joke you wanted to see a script...How many pages, 1 maybe 2? You have no characters...

Kong eats person one
Kong eats person two
Person Three: Help
Kong eats person three
T-Rex: growl
Kong kills T-Rex
Kong eats last person
The End

Can you show the finished product?

I look forward to it.

Squee, I'm still unsure. For now it's a B+ but could slip, if for no other reason than because I wanted an A and it fell short of that. Most things like WOTW and Batman Begins were B's.

I loved the film and am still awestruck from what I saw onscreen. The one Oscar worthy performance was Andy Serkis. Unbelievable physical actor!

what did he do? i dont remember seeing gollum in the movie?

He was King Kong, lol. He's the actor behind the beast!

LOL no way! i seriously did not know that. haha nice. poor guy. will he ever get an acting gig that shows us what he looks like

LOL no way! i seriously did not know that. haha nice. poor guy. will he ever get an acting gig that shows us what he looks like

LOL no way! i seriously did not know that. haha nice. poor guy. will he ever get an acting gig that shows us what he looks like

I want a script by Monday.

King Kong is academy award winning filmmaker Peter Jackson's followup to his Lord of the Rings trilogy, the highly anticipated remake of the classic film about a giant monkey that shocked audiences and blazed a trail for filmmakers in the special effects department in 1933. One of the first big popcorn type movies.

Of course, this isn't the first time King Kong has been remade, as the 1976 version starring Jeff Bridges, a young and hot Jessica Lange, and the World Trade center in it's first featured role in the movies proceeded it. The 76 remake is not without it's charms, but could never eclispe the original.

Peter Jackson's new 3 hour and 7 minute version is quite ambitious, but it doesn't reach the classic level, and some of it's flaws keep it away from what could have been. I think it was brilliant of PJ to make it a period piece, as modern day forces could restrain Kong from ever breaking free, and if he did, it would be over quick for him. The casting of Naomi Watts was great, as she is excellent reprising the role that Fay Wray will always be immoralized by. Though not an Oscar type of performance, she holds the screen well. Kong as a character was the real star for me, as his emotion came through fine. My favorite scene in the movie was when Kong would knock her over and laugh about it as he played with his new toy. By the end, I believed in both of their characters and how they felt for eachother.

Unfortunately, the same came be said about the relationship with Adrien Brody. Their relationship was incredibly forced, and instead of trying to introduce meaningless characters who were pretty one dimension and uninteresting, this relationship should have been built. He had the time to do it, but focused too much on the boring crew members. I also feel that Brody was not a good choice for Jack Driskel, as he didn't embody the dash and leading man looks that the character would have benefitted from onscreen. Jack Black was probably the weakest cast member, as he looked far too tense in the eyes. He wasn't horrible, but not quite as strong of a screen presence as the role needed to be.

The beginning also wasn't horrible, just not anything great. Jackson tried to stuff too much into it, and focused on the meaningless characters far too often, but it had it's moments. The natives on Skull Island were creepy, and the film took off after they got there. I felt the way they had the ONE native kidnap Ann was kinda dumb compared to the other two versions, and I believe the 76 remake handled the native scene where Ann is sacrificed to Kong best, but Jackson did it effectively. The action is great that follows, though I think too many wow moments are stuffed into it, and the stampede was cringe inducing, as you could tell it was green screen, and it was impossible from a physics standpoint for any of them to survive. The Raptors being added to the stampede was a bit much. It was very cheesy.

The final capture on Skull Island was a bit cheesy too, as Kong had just taken multiple bites from the T-Rex's, but was brought to his knees by a harpoon. The harpoon thing was a little weak. I didn't mind that they didn't show the trip home, as I think it's easy enough to figure that out for yourself, so that's not anything that I see as a complaint.

I thought the 3rd act was very well done, and I really wish that the rest of the film would have been as flawless as it was. The final look that Kong gives Ann is touching, as he knew it would be over soon and that he was trapped. It was genuinely touching. All in all, King Kong is really good popcorn entertainment, despite some stilted performances and cheesy dialogue and sequences. Check your brain and the door and enjoy the show. Suspend a little disbelief. It's a classic and beloved story that's competently done for modern audiences, though the flaws keep it from being a classic itself. I did buy the new Kong DVD today that Peter Jackson put out, and I am glad to have a filmmaker like Jackson in the game. Looking forward to his next film.



B+ or B

Well I have seen the much vaunted newest version of King Kong and I must say I feel like the boy who said "The Emperor has no clothes!"...

This movie is not just bad, it is pitiful. Peter Jackson can't tell a story worth a damn. Not only that, if you planning on seeing this movie just for the special effects - well, they're surprisingly lame too. For example, anytime Kong is holding Naomi Watts in his hand, any suspension of disbelief is immediately reinstated. All of the actors are miscast - even Watts. If Jackson was truly inspired by the original version of King Kong, then he completely misunderstood it - this is a botched job.

The fanboys are going to eat this up for a couple weeks, but the general public is not going to put up with three tedious hours of Jackson's juvenile interpretation of King Kong - and forget what people are saying about the first hour being boring - the whole enchilada is slack. Fortunately, the reign of Peter Jackson will be a short-lived one now that he has ruined adaptations of two all-time classic source materials. In five years, this guy's going to be back to making low budget horror movies.

I know that some people will reject my review as biased and unfair, but as a lover of movies, I swear that what I have said is true. In the fullness of time, those blinded by the hype will come to see the light.

1 out of 5.