Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Den Of Geek)   Looking back on the beautiful, long, messy, tragedy that was Peter Jackson's King Kong   ( denofgeek.com) divider line
    More: Interesting, King Kong, Carl Denham, Skull Island, Empire State Building, original King Kong, King Kong adventure, Merian C. Cooper, King Kong vs  
•       •       •

1974 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 16 Mar 2017 at 8:16 AM (22 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



67 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2017-03-16 07:27:04 AM  
The machine guns weren't rickety.  They were Lewis Guns.

Also, TFA fails to mention the Morse code Easter egg, "SHOW ME THE MONKEY", which shows that the author is illiterate.
 
2017-03-16 07:37:40 AM  
At this point, is there a King Kong movie that isn't a long, messy, and over told tragedy?
 
2017-03-16 08:21:55 AM  
In other words, it just was a little too long, wasn't it? Actually, that's being charitable since the theatrical cut for King Kong runs at 187 minutes

The first indication that there's nothing of value in that article. Lack of attention span on your part is no indication of quality or lack there of on the films part.
 
2017-03-16 08:27:35 AM  
Always enjoyed the movie and remember going to see it at the theater after being up for 24 hours and just finishing my last final for the semester. I know what I'm getting into when I put it on every now and then, or if I'm feeling less patient I skip to the point they're on the boat and almost on the island.
 
2017-03-16 08:31:36 AM  
As vanity projects tend to be. Following the massive success of LOTR he was allowed to do whatever he wanted so he chose to remake his favorite childhood movie.
 
2017-03-16 08:32:22 AM  
I hate that movie. It was 90 minutes too long.  I didn't need to know any back story for any character, they're all just cannon fodder for dinosaurs, giants bugs and Kong.  Focus on the monsters, not Naomi Watts eyefarking a gorilla for 10 minutes.  Officially turned me off Peter Jackson for good (I'll still watch the LOTR movies but thats it).  The T-Rex fight was AMAZING it's just sad you have to sit through hours of boring crap to get there.
 
2017-03-16 08:37:15 AM  

bglove25: I hate that movie. It was 90 minutes too long.  I didn't need to know any back story for any character, they're all just cannon fodder for dinosaurs, giants bugs and Kong.  Focus on the monsters, not Naomi Watts eyefarking a gorilla for 10 minutes.  Officially turned me off Peter Jackson for good (I'll still watch the LOTR movies but thats it).  The T-Rex fight was AMAZING it's just sad you have to sit through hours of boring crap to get there.


I loved the 30 minute waltz through Central Park as Kong tried to understand ice and ice skating.
 
2017-03-16 08:38:21 AM  

basemetal: At this point, is there a King Kong movie that isn't a long, messy, and over told tragedy?


Son of Kong is 69 minutes.
 
2017-03-16 08:39:24 AM  

Smoking GNU: In other words, it just was a little too long, wasn't it? Actually, that's being charitable since the theatrical cut for King Kong runs at 187 minutes

The first indication that there's nothing of value in that article. Lack of attention span on your part is no indication of quality or lack there of on the films part.


Except it was overlong.

It's a 100-minute story that Jackson padded out to 200 minutes.

It foretold everything that was wrong with The Hobbit.
 
2017-03-16 08:47:35 AM  
I tried re-watching this a while back, but after the first HOUR of sheer boredom, I just gave up watching and haven't gone back yet.
 
2017-03-16 08:52:14 AM  
I'll never forget my father's review of it:
"The movie's three hours long and it feels like an hour of it is just Jack Black's eyebrows."
 
2017-03-16 09:05:08 AM  
Is that the one where Kong and the girl live together in a Manhattan apartment for 20 years (shown in real time) before the military finally finds him?
 
2017-03-16 09:05:22 AM  
A well made movie that spent far too long not being a King Kong movie

Get to the farking Monkey (nsfw lyrics obviously).

/Side note: This music video (possibly nsfw - giant insect violence) remains the coolest thing associated with that movie.
 
2017-03-16 09:15:04 AM  
Godzooki.
 
2017-03-16 09:22:31 AM  
vignette3.wikia.nocookie.net
 
2017-03-16 09:35:14 AM  
I thought it was an amazing movie and have seen it several times.  I loved everything about it.
 
2017-03-16 09:37:18 AM  
Heavenly Creatures is Peter Jackson's greatest film.

/he discovered Kate Winslet
//and Melanie Lynskye
///"the world's greatest tenor Mario Lanza!"
 
2017-03-16 09:40:38 AM  
The BEST "King Kong"

 
2017-03-16 09:42:57 AM  
I know this is probably nit-picky, but there is a scene that ruins the movie for me.  They are in New York in the middle of January.  It's cold enough that there is ice, which they go out of their way to show that Kong is amazed by frozen water.  Everyone else is wearing coats.  But when he grabs Naomi Watts and climbs to the top of the Empire State building, she's wearing nothing but a sleeveless evening gown.  It's got to be colder and much windier at the top of the ESB, and she doesn't even shiver once.  I can suspend disbelief for the rest of the movie--60 foot monkey?  No problem.  Dinosaurs?  Sure, I'll believe that.  But a woman in a sleeveless dress not being cold?  That just wouldn't happen.
 
2017-03-16 09:47:57 AM  

Lorenzo Von Matterhorn: I know this is probably nit-picky, but there is a scene that ruins the movie for me.  They are in New York in the middle of January.  It's cold enough that there is ice, which they go out of their way to show that Kong is amazed by frozen water.  Everyone else is wearing coats.  But when he grabs Naomi Watts and climbs to the top of the Empire State building, she's wearing nothing but a sleeveless evening gown.  It's got to be colder and much windier at the top of the ESB, and she doesn't even shiver once.  I can suspend disbelief for the rest of the movie--60 foot monkey?  No problem.  Dinosaurs?  Sure, I'll believe that.  But a woman in a sleeveless dress not being cold?  That just wouldn't happen.


Maybe Kong emanates a lot of heat. Big mass and all.
 
2017-03-16 09:51:05 AM  
I would love to monkey around with Naomi Watts, if you know what I mean.
 
2017-03-16 09:51:12 AM  

Smoking GNU: In other words, it just was a little too long, wasn't it? Actually, that's being charitable since the theatrical cut for King Kong runs at 187 minutes

The first indication that there's nothing of value in that article. Lack of attention span on your part is no indication of quality or lack there of on the films part.


True, but in Jackson's Kong the argument has merit.  Everything is padded in that movie.  Almost every scene after getting on the boat goes well past where they should logically end and once the film gets to the island it turns into a giant game of "More!  More!  More!" with the visual effects.  You could chop 30 minutes out of that movie and lose nothing whereas taking 30 minutes out of the theatrical version of LotR negatively impacts the story.
 
2017-03-16 09:58:53 AM  
"Everyone has seen the original good King Kong!"

Uh. I didn't. And I didn't like the 2005 one but whatever. I guess I'm part of a weird subset that doesn't go out of my way to watch old "classics"
 
2017-03-16 10:00:19 AM  

Riotboy: Heavenly Creatures is Peter Jackson's greatest film.

/he discovered Kate Winslet
//and Melanie Lynskye
///"the world's greatest tenor Mario Lanza!"


Yup. Pity he's out the arthouse game now. He was damn good at it.
 
2017-03-16 10:02:37 AM  

Antidamascus: "Everyone has seen the original good King Kong!"

Uh. I didn't. And I didn't like the 2005 one but whatever. I guess I'm part of a weird subset that doesn't go out of my way to watch old "classics"


The original is still the best, in my opinion. If you can apply the right mental filters for its age.
 
2017-03-16 10:03:15 AM  
A couple dozen comments on the failures of this film... and not a single mention of Adrian Brody's performance yet? Seriously, that's the worst thing in the movie, imo.
 
2017-03-16 10:07:00 AM  
Peter could definitely use an editor.
 
2017-03-16 10:17:00 AM  
The part where they're interminably outrunning the dinosaurs is where I lost it. It seemed like half a freaking hour.
 
2017-03-16 10:18:27 AM  
Remove 95% of the journey to Skull Island and recast Jack Black and you've got yourself a good movie!
 
2017-03-16 10:25:21 AM  

Mr_Fabulous: A couple dozen comments on the failures of this film... and not a single mention of Adrian Brody's performance yet? Seriously, that's the worst thing in the movie, imo.


And by "Adrien Brody", you mean "Jack Black".

/every scene he's in just completely yanks you right out of the film
 
2017-03-16 10:33:01 AM  

darkeyes: I would love to monkey around with Naomi Watts, if you know what I mean.


I think I do.
 
2017-03-16 10:42:00 AM  

Antidamascus: "Everyone has seen the original good King Kong!"

Uh. I didn't. And I didn't like the 2005 one but whatever. I guess I'm part of a weird subset that doesn't go out of my way to watch old "classics"


It's worth watching. Besides being a culturally important film and basically the epitome of its form of special effects, it's also a revolutionary film in terms of its sound design and use of music.

Although antiquated now, this is one of the first uses of Mickey Mousing a score, where the music matches onset action and partially serves as the sound design.
 
2017-03-16 10:42:07 AM  
The scene where all the dinosaurs trip and fall and none of the people where squished into paste? Took me right out of the movie. Plus even when I saw it in the theater the effects were crap even then.
 
2017-03-16 10:42:58 AM  

trivial use of my dark powers: Remove 95% of the journey to Skull Island and recast Jack Black and you've got yourself a good movie!


Black was fine in the role as written.

The role was just badly written.
 
2017-03-16 10:47:52 AM  

trivial use of my dark powers: Remove 95% of the journey to Skull Island and recast Jack Black and you've got yourself a good movie!


I didn't mind Jack Black as much as Brody....but man that journey to Skull Island was interminable - and I loved the movie in general when it came out. It just has no "rewatchability" legs, like say Fury Road, or similar movies which are concise and compelling.
 
2017-03-16 10:51:50 AM  
As with many 'louzy' films, this one did have some good points:

s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com
 
2017-03-16 10:55:36 AM  

Smoking GNU: In other words, it just was a little too long, wasn't it? Actually, that's being charitable since the theatrical cut for King Kong runs at 187 minutes

The first indication that there's nothing of value in that article. Lack of attention span on your part is no indication of quality or lack there of on the films part.


What the article author is saying is that this movie should have been a trilogy.  Everyone knows that good movies come in 3 parts.
 
2017-03-16 11:01:25 AM  

Flappyhead: Smoking GNU: In other words, it just was a little too long, wasn't it? Actually, that's being charitable since the theatrical cut for King Kong runs at 187 minutes

The first indication that there's nothing of value in that article. Lack of attention span on your part is no indication of quality or lack there of on the films part.

True, but in Jackson's Kong the argument has merit.  Everything is padded in that movie.  Almost every scene after getting on the boat goes well past where they should logically end and once the film gets to the island it turns into a giant game of "More!  More!  More!" with the visual effects.  You could chop 30 minutes out of that movie and lose nothing whereas taking 30 minutes out of the theatrical version of LotR negatively impacts the story.


Well, not the last 30 minutes.  The end of Return of the King is 30 minutes too long and "ends" about 5 times.
 
2017-03-16 11:05:02 AM  
I liked the '77 Kong with Jeff Bridges.

/Charles Grodin goes squish now!
 
2017-03-16 11:07:23 AM  

bglove25: I hate that movie. It was 90 minutes too long.  I didn't need to know any back story for any character, they're all just cannon fodder for dinosaurs, giants bugs and Kong.  Focus on the monsters, not Naomi Watts eyefarking a gorilla for 10 minutes.  Officially turned me off Peter Jackson for good (I'll still watch the LOTR movies but thats it).  The T-Rex fight was AMAZING it's just sad you have to sit through hours of boring crap to get there.


I'll still watch The Frighteners....

/he did that, right? I used to think it was Robert Zemeckis, until a friend corrected me.
 
2017-03-16 11:31:11 AM  
An overly long article about an overly long movie.
 
2017-03-16 11:36:18 AM  

bglove25: Flappyhead: Smoking GNU: In other words, it just was a little too long, wasn't it? Actually, that's being charitable since the theatrical cut for King Kong runs at 187 minutes

The first indication that there's nothing of value in that article. Lack of attention span on your part is no indication of quality or lack there of on the films part.

True, but in Jackson's Kong the argument has merit.  Everything is padded in that movie.  Almost every scene after getting on the boat goes well past where they should logically end and once the film gets to the island it turns into a giant game of "More!  More!  More!" with the visual effects.  You could chop 30 minutes out of that movie and lose nothing whereas taking 30 minutes out of the theatrical version of LotR negatively impacts the story.

Well, not the last 30 minutes.  The end of Return of the King is 30 minutes too long and "ends" about 5 times.


That I will grant you.
 
2017-03-16 11:38:54 AM  

bglove25: Flappyhead: Smoking GNU: In other words, it just was a little too long, wasn't it? Actually, that's being charitable since the theatrical cut for King Kong runs at 187 minutes

The first indication that there's nothing of value in that article. Lack of attention span on your part is no indication of quality or lack there of on the films part.

True, but in Jackson's Kong the argument has merit.  Everything is padded in that movie.  Almost every scene after getting on the boat goes well past where they should logically end and once the film gets to the island it turns into a giant game of "More!  More!  More!" with the visual effects.  You could chop 30 minutes out of that movie and lose nothing whereas taking 30 minutes out of the theatrical version of LotR negatively impacts the story.

Well, not the last 30 minutes.  The end of Return of the King is 30 minutes too long and "ends" about 5 times.


The main difference between the two is that the bits of Kong that need to be trimmed are in the middle, whereas the bits of RotK are at the end.
 
2017-03-16 11:47:45 AM  

puckrock2000: Mr_Fabulous: A couple dozen comments on the failures of this film... and not a single mention of Adrian Brody's performance yet? Seriously, that's the worst thing in the movie, imo.

And by "Adrien Brody", you mean "Jack Black".

/every scene he's in just completely yanks you right out of the film


Agreed. I and everybody with me (those who hadn't fallen asleep already) busted out laughing at this line:

 
2017-03-16 11:54:22 AM  

buntz: I liked the '77 Kong with Jeff Bridges.

/Charles Grodin goes squish now!


Dude, even the guy who played Kong doesn't like the 1977 Kong.
 
2017-03-16 11:55:27 AM  

This text is now purple: basemetal: At this point, is there a King Kong movie that isn't a long, messy, and over told tragedy?

Son of Kong is 69 minutes.


I've seen Son of Kong.  Sixty-nine minutes is too long.
 
2017-03-16 11:56:31 AM  

bglove25: Flappyhead: Smoking GNU: In other words, it just was a little too long, wasn't it? Actually, that's being charitable since the theatrical cut for King Kong runs at 187 minutes

The first indication that there's nothing of value in that article. Lack of attention span on your part is no indication of quality or lack there of on the films part.

True, but in Jackson's Kong the argument has merit.  Everything is padded in that movie.  Almost every scene after getting on the boat goes well past where they should logically end and once the film gets to the island it turns into a giant game of "More!  More!  More!" with the visual effects.  You could chop 30 minutes out of that movie and lose nothing whereas taking 30 minutes out of the theatrical version of LotR negatively impacts the story.

Well, not the last 30 minutes.  The end of Return of the King is 30 minutes too long and "ends" about 5 times.


to be fair the book does that too :P
 
2017-03-16 11:57:11 AM  

DjangoStonereaver: As with many 'louzy' films, this one did have some good points:

[s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com image 531x800]


But unlike Fay Wray and Jessica Lange, she didn't flash tit.
 
2017-03-16 11:58:12 AM  
In the original, Faye Ray flashes boob for a fraction of a second. In the original, King Kong tears off most of Faye Ray's clothes. In Jackson's mess. Naomi Watts is abducted in her nightgown, runs all over rocky ground and through jungle in her bare feet and the nightgown is spotless when she is rescued, no alluring rips, no boob and her feet are not cut to ribbons. The movie lost me there . Not to mention that Jack Black is the worst actor in the world.
 
2017-03-16 12:02:43 PM  

Flappyhead: Smoking GNU: In other words, it just was a little too long, wasn't it? Actually, that's being charitable since the theatrical cut for King Kong runs at 187 minutes

The first indication that there's nothing of value in that article. Lack of attention span on your part is no indication of quality or lack there of on the films part.

True, but in Jackson's Kong the argument has merit.  Everything is padded in that movie.  Almost every scene after getting on the boat goes well past where they should logically end and once the film gets to the island it turns into a giant game of "More!  More!  More!" with the visual effects.  You could chop 30 minutes out of that movie and lose nothing whereas taking 30 minutes out of the theatrical version of LotR negatively impacts the story.


The thing is, the film acknowledges this.  That Easter egg I mentioned is near the end of what seems like an interminable ocean voyage, and it is ostensibly the radio operator on the ship copying a message for the captain telling him to turn the ship around and arrest Carl Denham, but the Morse actually says "SHOW ME THE MONKEY".

So they *KNEW*, it's an artistic choice.
 
Displayed 50 of 67 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.

In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report