Also another thing: Rose's case required precision. Jimmy didn't exactly have to shoot very close to Jack, as the giant beatles were just that: giant. As long as Jack stood still, like Jimmy edged him to do, shooting one off of him wouldn't take much. Just my opinion, of course. I think we're arguing over such a tiny thing, heh.

PEACE, Mike.

I guess you missed the part where both Tony and I said we've fired them?

It was incredibly unrealistic. I'll nitpick the entire movie to death if you really want to do backflips trying to justify things like that. Why is it so hard to admit imperfections when they are?

Jimmy was only a few feet away and was opening that gun up on those things like nobody's business. Between that and the stampede, I'd say Peter Jackson was definitely asking the audience to check their brains. I've got to hand it to PJ for his ability to do that. I swear, I'm the only person in this world that noticed that Aragorn was running from a bunch of Uruk-Hai in TTT one second, and the next second he magically appeared inside the fortress that 10,00 strong Uruk-Hai were still outside trying to get into. Nobody noticed but me! I challenge anybody to find a mention of that before I did. Part of that probably has to do with the Helm's Deep battle probably being the greatest battle ever filmed, but still... The guy definitely has a gift for getting away with stuff, however he does it.

Oh yeah, and I suppose that Obi-Wan falling like 500 feet into a lake, and swimming out unscathed, now that is realistic right?

Just out of curiosity I did count how many times BKB has posted up till now in this thread - it is 19 times.

For context here's all of the other posters' totals for this thread up until this point:

Lennier = 1
Goldie = 1
Squee = 1
Raz = 1
lilmac = 1
christian = 1
insomniac dude = 1
Chris = 1
Sauron = 1
frenchman = 1
Kypade = 1
Joe = 1
Nazgul9 = 1
el_masked_asteroid = 1
illuvjuanki = 1
rolandka19 = 1
revolutions = 1
Shack = 2
Tony Montana = 2
Thompson Cory = 2
The Dark Shape = 2
Killuminati = 3
Movie Buf = 3
Cleric = 3
Movie Dude = 3
Benny Blanco = 3
I_was_your_Sam = 3
Box = 4
Nebs = 5
Choubachou = 6
Riggs 27 = 6
Bradley Witherberry = 7
Mike Q = 8
Amos = 8
BacktotheFuture = 9
Zingaling = 9
Maverikk = 10
loyal from london = 10
Baba = 13
Jeff(S) = 15
StarWars = 18
Ahmed Johnson = 18
Dr. Lecter = 21
Chipmunky = 22

(Note: Just for fun, see how many of those listed have posted an actual review of the movie King Kong...)

I win... and I posted a partial review... I have a dislike for writing long pieces of information

In my preceding post, the stats were based on the 254 posts up until that point in time.

Therefore, out of the 45 individual WOKJ members who have posted in this thread - just seven people (Chipmunky, Dr. Lecter, BKB, Ahmed Johnson, StarWars, Jeff(S), and Baba) account for half the posts in this thread!

3 of those LOVED it... 3 didn't like it at all... and one hasn't seen it...

Ahmed will sway the way of the Loved it crowd

MAJORITY RULES! Thus Kong is really AMAZING

Yes, he has the force to break his fall....duh.

Because Star Wars fans don't feel threatened by Mike Newell.

BJs Grade:

A

Great film, Kong freekin rocked the whole scene with the bugs was disgusting, not one I am willing to sit though again

8.5-9/10

Very nice movie only negativ points

-too long actionscenes that are pointless sometimes
- I had the feeling that something was missing to really enter the world (to dive into the movie)
-Overall the movie could also have been done in 150 minutes
- stupid Slowmo


Fantastic CGI on Kong and absolutely excellent Cinematography and overall exciting. If you have a relationship at the moment go and see the movie with your girlfriend. There was a couple next to us and hell if that girl is as wet at home in bed as she was in the movie
olalalalalala

The only sign of wetness I saw on women watching King Kong was from being bored to tears, not something I've ever seen on a girl home in bed...

Well, for the record, I said I did like it and thought it was GOOD at a "C+" Grade, BUT For the love of God, it wasn't as gushingly great as it was made out to be.. It just wasn't and I'm sorry, but I think there were fans of Jackson and his LOTR films that were very biased toward giving this movie anything but an "A" before even seeing it and that folks is TRUE..

Just a few thoughts (most of them already posted in a completely different thread):

- It's WAY too long (I could have easely cut an hour) - the original is 100 minutes long, and besides, if they're going to make a (much) longer film at least don't cut it immediately to New York when they capture Kong, just like in the original.. I don't know...

- Naomi Watts is great as usual and her scenes with Kong are really good and even emotional at times, which is incredible, considering she was interacting "alone" most of the time, I guess..

- Jackson's direction is almost impecable... almost.. I was so annoyed with THAT camera movement..

- The effects are some of the best I've seen, there are alot of breathtaking sequences -even if some tend to run a little too long, and it's technically perfect, or almost perfect - which leads to point #5;

- James Newton Howard has done much better than this - he should have won last year with The Village. The score is decent and adequate but easely forgettable - maybe because Howard didn't have too much time to work on it, but still - a Golden Globe nom?

- Did I say it was way too long?

- Somewhat decent performances from the rest of the cast, but ironically one of the best supporting performances (Jamie Bell) should have been left out on the cutting floor, because the entire subplot envolving that character leads to nowhere, except when it comes in handy (i.e., seeing land and killing bugs)... And did he survive? 'Cause I don't even remember.. and I actually love the actor since he had that breakthrough role 5 years ago..


Having said all this, I liked it - apart from the fact that it was too long and other minor quibbles..

But it really needs a "shorter version" and not an extended one.. in that case, I'm ready to buy the dvd, because other than the running time problem, it's almost perfect...


a 7/10

Then please grace us with a review...

Also, if you look at the poll results, THIS MOVIE HAS 40 A'S. 40! HOLY SHIT!

I am willing to wager that I hated the LOTR movies more than anyone on the face of this Earth... I still to this day have nightmares of being forced to watch the movies and will never forgive my wife for dragging me to the theater.

However, I liked Kong and would give it an A-. It's not perfect, but it was a fun movie. Much, much, much better than those LOTR movies.

For about an hour and a half, the film is excellent. Really a stand-out classic for those 90 minutes. But then you have another 90 minutes that really don't sit well with me. Like Loyal, I thought the slo-mo stuff was bad. Horrible. The first hour almost kills the rest of the film (but the action and adventure that follows redeems the film from being a wreck). For the remaining two hours, there's a few slow spots, and when the slow spots arrive, it's like the entire movie comes to a screeching halt.

But, the special FX, the action, the adventure. It's all incredible once it kicks in. The acting is pretty good for the most part, but no one stood out. I don't think Naomi Watts is particularily Oscar-worthy for wearing a confused stare for an hour, and a stare full of pity for another hour. I think she's great, but great rarely means Oscar-worthy. Has to be a slow year for great to equal Oscar. I actually liked Jack Black in the movie. I was willing to believe that he could do a good job in Kong, and he did. Surprising, since the choice was pretty much the same as putting Jim Carrey, Will Ferrell or Ben Stiller in the same role. Don't know how the others would fare, but Black did good.

I would give the other 90 minutes a solid A, but I can't let it slip that an hour passes by and mini-development for characters is crammed in, but we don't learn anything substantial about anyone. There are three leads (four, if you include Kong), and none are really explored enough. Since the film clocks in at three hours, I think there should have been part of the time devoted to more development. I'll give this a generous B+. It's still 60-90 minutes that end up being slow. I can't give an A just for the other 90 or so minutes of awesomeness. Realistically, it's a B, but to avoid getting into a fist-fight, I'll go with my original B+.

Very nearly flawless. Very. In fact, the only thing I can point out was the phenomenal score was not phenomenal enough. Easily the best 'pure' American, 2005 film of the year (2nd of 2005 behind only a 2004 Korean film.)


I really loved this movie.


PS, the slow-mo was fantastic, luzrs.

In due time..Ahmed The Magnificent is struggling with a grade..having expected an excellent movie, it confounded The Black Steel by being absolutely fucking brilliant! It was like the best bag of sweets ever

I liked the Kong and Ann slow-mo, for example Bye Bye Blackbird sequence.

But the typewriter scene and native attack. No no no.