I didn't expect to love it that much because of the running time but I absolutely loved it! Everything was perfect. The cast were all brilliant in their roles, and I thought the story was very good, and I was blown away by the effects. They looked so realistic, and Kong looked extraordinary. There was also some comic relief thrown into the film, and that really helped it. Naomi Watts gave a really great performance too. The sets were amazing, and the cinematography was really breathtaking. While watching this film I had to really go to the bathroom, but I was so into the movie that I held it, and then I finally went and only missed 2 minutes of the film, but my sister told me what I missed so it wasn't a big loss. All I can say is that it was a really good film, and people that want to complain about the long running time I actually liked the length. Rather than being a non-stop action/adventure film we actually got a great character study, and it developed the story really well. I wouldn't have it any other way. Peter Jackson has done it again. He has created another classic, and this film should be making a lot more money than it is.

A

Well, it wasn't as good as everyone has been making it out to be. The first hour was painful, and wasn't even interesting. The sets and effects were fantastic, but there was no meaning to them. No emotion. The bug scene, though, was one of the most disturbing things I've ever seen. Those bugs in the pond sucking that guy's head.... nightmares for weeks. I didn't really like the last act either, but I liked the bonds the people had made that went on the expedition. They had a look to each other that was good. Reminded me of Jurassic Park 2 & 3, how Jeff Goldblum acted, and how Dr. Grant and Satler responded to each other.

Grade: B

Yes, everyone is, but no one realizes it. Quotes should be disabled here, so everyone has to only write a review, and that's it. Then, this post would be non-existent, but that's okay.

A

It wasn't as mind-blowing as I expected. And it did take its time to get going (did we really need the relationship between Jimmy and Mr Haynes expanding? Was it really necessary for all that slow-mo when Jack's typing Skull Island?). But the stuff on the island and in New York was just phenomenal. There's a near-perfect movie hidden underneath all the padding... I imagine with a little more time in the editing suite, Jackson might've got the mix just right.

That's what happens when you like a film bkb doesn't want you to.

Oh, I forgot to mention the camera-work was AWFUL. 100 of the worst slow-motion shots ever (reminded me of Walker). Then the most dizzifying action shots ever to where you can't even tell what was going on. I think it was an excuse to save a little money on the CGI shots. Blur everything and call it quits.

I fully expected to hate this film, I am not a fan of hte KK films, I didn't want to see the film and I thought Jack Black was an awful choise for the film.

Well low and behold, I loved hte film, Kong himself was perfect, Black was bad for hte first bad of the film but once the film hits the ship he hits his stride as the character.

Effects wise, Kong was perfect but my god, the blending of backgrounds was god awful at times.

I loved the film, it will be in my top ten for the year.

I told you you'd see it and you said you wouldn't.



Glad you liked it.

Thank-you for your honesty about the effects - it's a very rare quality when it comes to reviewing this film...

Stop embarassing yourself

I just saw it and I really liked it. I give it a B+ Naomi Watts was amazing in it and to me she's worthy of a couple of awards. The movie as a whole I don't think is Oscar worthy. It felt like a summer blockbuster (and i think it should've been released then) rather than an Oscar contender (for Best picture anyway).

The Pros:
- The CGI. Kong was amazing! He looked very very real and at no time was I questioning the graphics when it came to him.
- Lead actress was amazing so was Adrian Brodie.
- Great great great scene between Kong and the 3 T-Rexs.

The Cons.
- The dinosaur CGI. Those brontasauruses looked cheap. I seen better graphics for dinosaurs in Jurassic Park (including the T-Rex's)
- Too much greenscreen. The Brontasaurus chase sequence was overtly fake and some ppl in the theatre were laughing.
- Jack Black; his character was unrealistic and he wasn't the greatest for the role.

The movie was great and I seriously recommend it to everyone who hasn't seen it

Speaking about that, we're still waiting on your review...

He uses BKB's font.

But he hates Kong.

Will our hero BKB praise him, or trash him? DUN DUN DUN...

Listen who the hell is bkb i didnt know that was his font ooooooo big deal?

^^^^^^^^^HAPPY?

Calm down. BKB is the resident troll. In a good/funny way though.

Hi Sweetheart.. I'm BKB and I generally post in BOLD, but your Blue Font isn't that shabby either and not hard on my eyes as it is for others I suppose.. Either way, Welcome to KJ.. I to thought that KONG wasn't as great as it was made out to be, but was merely Good and I gave it a "C+" and because of this grade, folks seem to think I hated it, but I didn't.. It was simply a more down to earth grade for a Overly CGI Laden movie.. Rick Baker from the 76 KONG was still better and I still enjoyed KONG walking upright and he looked larger to than Jackson's KONG..

I just came from watching it.

Well, I hesitate to give it any grade, but if I were forced to, I'd say either a B/B-, or B+/A-, depending on how you look at it (I really don't want to grade it).

What's so strange about the film is that many of its composite parts are so superbly well-crafted, yet the film as a whole seems very dishevelled, overlong, and diluted. Consider, for example, the two action sequences on the island involving the Allosauri and the Tyrannosauri. Both are completely unnecessary. They add nothing to the plot whatsover. If you want to show King Kong protecting Ann from dinosaurs, you can do that in 5 minutes and get it over with.

Yet both scenes are astonishingly well-made. In fact, so there is so much going on that they go over the top (that's what I mean by diluted- so much of it that it wears thin after a while. One T-Rex is cool, 2 are good, 3 are too much). Yet to complain seems almost absurd. We should be grateful that anyone has the courage and stamina and imagination to give us sequences like that.

About the human characters: I understand that Brodie and Black aren't your typical heros, blah blah blah. I don't care. I wish the captain of the ship, who fits the hero type much more, would have taken charge. This is a personal opinion, but so is everything else in this thread. As for the characters in general, I can say that I didn't particularly care much about their deaths, and that I came to loathe Jack Black's character after he completely insulted his dead friends by framing his actions so as to excuse the continuation of the project.

About Naomi Watts: Oh my goodness. What a beauty, and what an absolutely charming woman! I'm head over heels for Watts Absolutely gorgeous, and very genuine. I believed her, and was affected from beginning to end. Great facial expressions

About King Kong: I don't really think much needs to be said. This is yet another triumph for Jackson/Serkis and computer animation as a whole. A profoundly moving character, and more real than many a character I have had to observe in many other films. Well, actually, I think King Kong's might be one of the best performances of the year.

About the length: the film is interesting enough to keep me awake throughout, but there is absolutely no doubt that the film's length is felt. The problem, I think, is because of the sheer diversity of subplots/subfilms: we start with one kind of film, 1930s Depression-era NYC with struggling artists, then we move on to a different film about an adventure on the sea, then another film about some mysterious island, then another film about King Kong. It's basically three or four good films packed into one. But of course, if one were to cut it, it wouldn't be Jackson's film, which would be a shame. One thing though: it's clearly rushed in parts, to overcome length restrictions. Ann and Adrien Brody are at one part struggling in the river, then all of a sudden they are running in the forest. That's an inexcusable short-cut. The river part is too dramatic to simply dismiss and jump over.

About the dinosaurs: aside from it being perhaps too much of a good thing, I really loved it all. I mean, I'm into dinosaurs anyways, so I thought it was really neat.

About the other animals: really unnecessary. The insects were ridiculous, and the bats even more so.

About the natives: Urgh, urgh, urgh! At least this time, there was one good black guy. They are so obscenely comical.

About the relationships: the Kong/Ann rlnship is remarkably well developed, to such an extent that I'm trying to remember what Jackson did to make it so believable. I think I know: it's not that Ann loves Kong (let's not be ridiculous), or that Kong loves her. Rather, Ann has indentified someone else who, like her, has basically been isolated his/its entire lifetime. From Kong's perspective, the appreciation probably is that in Ann, there is someone who is not a threat, but someone/something worth protecting. As unromantic as it sounds, I can imagine Kong being as attached to a puppy as he is to Ann, if only a puppy had eyes like Watts, or a face as full of pity as hers.

As for the other relationships, I thought the one between the black man and the boy who was reading Heart of Darkness was more well developed and convincing than the one between Brody and Watts. And btw, by rlnship I mean mentor/student, so please don't get the wrong idea (a more daring director would probably have tackled that issue which at any rate is not foreign to seamanship, heh). For this reason, I was appalled by the ending with Watts and Brody embracing right after Kong's death. I don't feel we have been sufficiently made to believe that this would be a logical outcome. And come on, it's right after Kong has died!


Some other observations:

- The Central Park ice scene: I'm sorry, but I think it was over the top ridiculous. Ironically, it came just after what is in my opinion the most touching scene in the film, when Ann appears out of the light in front of Kong. Very touching, very well-done, a real highlight that will stick with me for al ong time. I've seen few women anywhere as beautiful as Watts at that instance.


- The New York and Skull Island settings are so wonderfully created, they are truly among the two greatest sceneries I have come across in cinema. The way that the Empire State Building was shown, incredible!

-Jackson is basically my favourite filmmaker right now. What an astonishing imagination and heart! You could sense the love for the film and Kong. And it's always cause for wonder to lay back and observe what a great mind does with decades of preceding cinematic material: the dinosaurs, the natives, 1930s New York, King Kong itself, and much else.


Having said all of this, much of which has been negative, I can't stress enough how deeply I appreciated many of the scenes and sequences in this film. It's so odd to say this, but it seems the biggest problem this film has is that in many cases, it is too much of a good thing. But that, really, is not a bad thing in the end.

On a personal level, my only regret is that the film wasn't around when I was a child. Had I seen this as a kid, it would undoubtedly have been among my childhood favourites. I would trade Jurassic Park for it without a moment's hesitation.

Awesome Box! I value your opinions, and that was a great read.

The only comment I was disappointed on and rather shocked was the comment that the Central Park scene is "ridiculous". You found it to be so bad that you would call it ridiculous? I found it to be one of the best of the film. It's too bad you didn't like that scene.

PEACE, Mike.

I should've edited that out. That's what you get for hastily writing down your first impressions without carefully thinking it out. Everybody, take the above comments as a rundown of my first impressions. Gawd, it's so juvenile, lol!


Mike, I thought the scene was very sweet, so sweet that it was startling, a bit too sweet for my taste. We've seen Kong just beforehand tearing through New York City, and actually killing people, and within a few minutes, he is completely transformed. I understand that Ann has that effect on him, but I thought the point was much better made in that superb scene where she appears in front of him and he begins to calm down. I can't believe how well Jackson pulled it off (well, I can, since I've seen it ). He could have had Ann running frantically along the street trying to stop Kong, or her doing her scream so as to attract his attention. Instead, we get simple silence, which is perfect because it gives an indication of just how deep the bond is between the two now (they don't need to scream and shout at each other, something human couples could learn from them). And the way that Ann appears to us is (probably unconsciously) a throw-back to Galadriel and Arwen, and their appearances, as with Ann's, mark a point of transition (Arwen appears to take Frodo away, Galadriel's appearance indicates that a new episode has begun, her re-appearance in ROTK signals a change in Frodo's fortune by giving him courage, and so on).


In the case of King Kong, Ann's appearance basically marks the beginning of the end for King Kong, because it places him in a situation in which he is completely vulnerable: he must protect this girl, and his enemies can use her to bring him down (as they have done before on Skull Island). As it turns out, he really is brought down because he tries to protect her. When Jack Black's character says at the end 'It was beauty killed the beast', he makes a very grave mistake, in keeping with the comments made by the other people ('It's just a monkey', for example). He is basically saying that Ann somehow wanted to harm Kong, by making him subject to her (basically, Kong climbs the Empire State Building because it is the closest thing to his home, as the one place that overlooks the entire island of Manhattan, from which he can see everything and keep track of any threats). Yet this requires a level of calculation and cruelty that is out of step with the character as Watts portrays her. We know she is calculating and smart, because she understands that in order to survive, she must keep Kong entertained, and promptly proceeds to do so on Skull Island. But the sunset scene clearly suggests that an understanding has been reached between the two which is genuine, heartfelt and deep. Carl Denham, in typical fashion, completely misses that. What I find interesting is how heavily the term beautiful is emphasized in the interaction between Kong and Ann; it's basically the one word which connects them: beauty. And I think this is very significant, because Ann sees the beauty hidden beneath the outward beast which the world sees as a threat. That's why I have 'It was its Beauty that Killed the Beast' in my signature- something deep inside Kong (this 'beautiful' thing that makes him appreciate the sunset, and which Ann sees) made him want to protect Ann by climbing the Empire State Building, and it is that which ends up destroying him.

Also, one of the things that I found interesting is how little Ann says after her encounter with King Kong, as opposed to the first part of the film. Count the number of times she actually speaks; there are remarkably few instances of that. Yet, we always sense that we not only understand what she's thinking, but what she's feeling. Credit Watts and her incredible ability to convey emotions physically. She does all this in front of what probably was either just the blue screen, or a furry head on a stick. It's quite something to imagine all of that emotion being 'just' acting.

Just a note on New York/Skull Island: Both Manhattan and King Kong's home are islands, and I think Jackson is underlining the connection here. The audience members in the theatre in New York are just like the natives on the island looking on as Ann is being offered to Kong. The difference is that the New York version is an imitation (Denham discusses this idea when he says that he wants to bring the wilderness and offer it up to everyone to see for the price of an admission ticket, something which Jackson is doing with this film). When Kong breaks lose (symbolizing reality creeping up on the theatre goers), the response of the Manhattan Island residents is to destroy him. What neither the Skull or Manhattan islanders see is that Kong is more than a beast. The message is rather clear: it doesn't matter whether a place is savage or civilized, one can be just as ignorant as the other. For us as theatre goers who have paid an admission ticket to watch King Kong, this should serve as a warning: look beneath the surface. There is something beautiful to be found there.


I hope this post made more sense. The more I think about the film, the more I like it. I'm bringing it up to A-, which is very high for me, on par with and/or above the LOTR films (I'm not very liberal in handing out As). The original King Kong created a myth which became a myth because it contains a truth about us, whatever that truth is. Perhaps the real beast is not King Kong, but Man? Whatever it is, I think Jackson has clearly understood it, and his King Kong is proof of that.

Glad to see you have no problem with my font as well as im also glad to see you didnt love this movie...You didnt hate it either but im just glad someone else did love it.

Finally saw this tonight. I had time to burn, and a car at home, so a movie sound good. I chose this over Munich, because I went with a friend, and he isn't 17 yet....damn R rating. Anyway, the movie:

First and foremost, King Kong is the most badass ape/ninja I've ever seen. He freaking bit off a Tyranosaur tongue, then impaled it's jaw into itself. You can't get much more hardcore than that. The action throughout the entire movie was always itnesne. I never felt bored...except, perhaps, at the end, when Kong's demise was a bit too dragged out. In fact, that's the only part in the entire movie where I felt it drag.

Naomi Watts is perhaps the most beautiful woman alive. 'Nuff said.

All three leads were strong. I don't know if they were oscar-worthy (I could see Watts with a nomination, but I wouldn't bet on it or anything) but still strong. I could have done without the black guy. Most of his lines felt cliche. "Don't be brave for me Jimmy! Run!" Could they have possibly chosen anything more cliche than Jimmy? Honestly. I almost laughed pu my soda at some of the lines.

The special effects weren't as good as I was expecting. The close-ups of Kong (especially his face) were incredible. Some of the best CGI work I've ever seen. The smaller creatures and bugs were fantastic, and all of the practical special effects were on par. But the wider shots of Kong/Skull Island weren't as great. There always seemed to be something unnatural about Kong's hair. And the lighting/shadow effects on Kong? Not so hot. Those shots really took me out of the movie.

At that, they were the only thing that took me out of the movie. One thing I must remark about this fantasy adventure is how real it felt to me. I never questioned if Skull Island were real or made-up. It felt real. The entire movie felt within the boundaries of reality, something which almost no other fantasy/advneture movie has done for me. That alone gets Jackson mondo brownie points.

Kudos to Jackson. He had to live up to the reputation of the original Kong Kong, as well as follow-up the Lord of the Rings, something most men under which would have buckled from the pressure. I think Kong proves that he should be a staying name as an A-list director.

A-

I hate to add to the length of the post anymore, but I must remark about how many films I've seen this year were "great, but not amazing". As in a B+/A- range. I saw one or two A+ films (I usually see about five) and the rest were A- ish. Moreso than any year recently.

Which two movies got A+ last year from you? Harry Potter and?

Batman Begins. I gave Revenge of the Sith an A+ initially, but after some more viewings it's done in the A- range.

People told me the that the first 50 minutes of the movie was so boring ..... that was total BS!, yeah it was slow at the beginning but it wasnt boring AT ALL!! and i was somewhat surprise usually movies past 2 hours are to tedious to me

anyways...I FINALLY GOT TO SEE THIS MOVIE!!!

and it was Exciting, Heartbreaking, Touching, Amazing, Thrilling, Wonderful, Cute and Funny simply.....BRILLIANT.

OK yeah, the visuals were not all that great, there were some unintentionally laughable scenes, but who cares the movie was a blast!!

A+