KING KONG *trailer!*

jasodia · Post by **jasodia** » Mon Dec 19, 2005 9:54 am

Me wrote:I just got back from it.... absolutely amazing! Need to see it again before writing much of a review, though.

really? it looked really stupid to me.

Me · Post by Me » Mon Dec 19, 2005 12:16 pm

jasodia wrote:
Me wrote:I just got back from it.... absolutely amazing! Need to see it again before writing much of a review, though.
really? it looked really stupid to me.

The premise may sound crazy, but it was really good. The character development is just so good. It's an amazing example of good storytelling. Sure, it has a few problems, but there aren't many films like this anymore.

king kong skater · Post by **king kong skater** » Tue Dec 20, 2005 3:40 am

ive watched the old king kongs now and tomorow im going to watch the new king kong

Larry The Pickle · Post by **Larry The Pickle** » Tue Dec 20, 2005 10:20 pm

If you watch the 1933 version than you'll notice they're mostly the same. PJ made this as a homage to that.

JesusFreak777 · Post by **JesusFreak777** » Wed Dec 21, 2005 2:14 am

A certan SOMEONE forced me to see it with them.. but they allowed me to hide during the scary icky parts. I hought it was pretty good, though it was a little long in places...like when Kong was fighting the dinosaurs...that went on FOREVER

Other than that...I can say that I have seen it and that I didn't spend any money to do so $\:D/$

pianokitty · Post by **pianokitty** » Wed Dec 21, 2005 2:16 am

It would have been a LOT better if it wasnt 3 hours long. Overall..I liked it. But 3 hours is a long time to be sitting there watching King Kong..and they could have cut out some of the "trying to snatch the airplanes while they fly over King Kong's head and the T-Rex vs. King Kong and the dinasaur stampede. And some of the humor was a little out of place. But the abonimable snowman line was AWESOME!!!

Trinarius · Post by **Trinarius** » Wed Dec 21, 2005 9:37 pm

I was REALLY looking forward to seeing this movie. I knew that with Peter Jackson at the helm, this would be a film of epic proportions. So I read pluggedinmag's review, which I usually do for new movies, and discover that there is an excessive amount of bad language, including misuses of Christ's name. That's a shame. Sure, it's probably a good movie as far as acting and effects are concerned, but I really don't feel like paying to listen to excessive profanity.

The Top Crusader · Post by **The Top Crusader** » Wed Dec 21, 2005 10:59 pm

There was a little profanity but it certainly wouldn't be classified as "excessive" (well, any at all is excessive I suppose, but really, there wasn't much in this...).

Me · Post by Me » Wed Dec 21, 2005 11:12 pm

You are correct. Also, I noticed that in the pluggedin review, they actually misqoted on at least one occasion. The noted one profanity or inappropriate comment, which actually sounded similar in the movie, but wasn't bad at all.

Also, keep in mind that this amount of profanity is usually found in movies that are about 90 minutes long. With a runtime of over three hours, the profanity is really spread out, and for the length, there isn't very much at all.

Jennifer Doyle · Post by **Jennifer Doyle** » Thu Dec 22, 2005 12:01 am

Three hours long? That sealed the deal, I'm not seeing it!

Fenix · Post by **Fenix** » Thu Dec 22, 2005 12:04 am

The movie had its moments but overall it was just ok.

Me · Post by Me » Thu Dec 22, 2005 12:07 am

Jennifer Doyle wrote:Three hours long? That sealed the deal, I'm not seeing it!

To me, at least, it didn't seem like a three hour movie (even though it was). Time FLEW! Or maybe I'm just a junkie for this kind of stuff.....

The Top Crusader · Post by **The Top Crusader** » Thu Dec 22, 2005 9:20 am

Well, I disliked LotR and thought they dragged, but King King seemed like it was a half hour or something...

Trinarius · Post by **Trinarius** » Thu Dec 22, 2005 12:26 pm

Me wrote:You are correct. Also, I noticed that in the pluggedin review, they actually misqoted on at least one occasion. The noted one profanity or inappropriate comment, which actually sounded similar in the movie, but wasn't bad at all.

Also, keep in mind that this amount of profanity is usually found in movies that are about 90 minutes long. With a runtime of over three hours, the profanity is really spread out, and for the length, there isn't very much at all.

That's good to hear. The fact that the language could have been spread out did cross my mind, but I wasn't sure. Like Top said, any profanity at all in a movie isn't right, but it seems to be the norm in films these days.

Maybe I'll go see it after all...

The Top Crusader · Post by **The Top Crusader** » Thu Dec 22, 2005 1:25 pm

If you want a great film with no profanity check out King Kong VS Godzilla or King Kong Escapes... $\:D/$

Trent DeWhite · Post by **Trent DeWhite** » Sat Dec 24, 2005 2:06 am

I just got back from watching the film with my cousins this evening. Having never watched or read anything about King Kong before, I went into the theatre with a fairly objective perspective (I think

). That movie was incredible.

I definitely enjoyed Lord of the Rings better, but that was due to my bias of having read and studied Tolkien's trilogy prior to viewing the films. That being said, Peter Jackson did an excellent job with King Kong. Whoever did the score receives a pat on a back, because it really contributed to the drama. As it should.

It was great seeing Andy Serkis in the film, even though I didn't recognize him completely until... ahem... a certain point in the movie. Jack Black truly fit the character of Carl, as I had absolutely no sympathy for him once they reached the island. I loathed that character. He was the true villain.

Tinuviel · Post by **Tinuviel** » Sun Dec 25, 2005 10:01 pm

King-Kong... I just say it 2 days ago. I would have liked it if it would have been shorter. 3 hours was way too long. The t-rex fight was great, though it lasted a little too long. The bugs were- *shivers* I'm fine with anything but grasshoppers, crickets, locust, etc... They were nasty. Overall the special effects were very good, & Peter Jackson stayed pretty close to the original.

Danadelfos · Post by **Danadelfos** » Tue Dec 27, 2005 9:45 am

I saw it yesterday and I pretty much thought that it was an okay movie that you see once and you say well that was okay/good and say well that's enough of that movie for the next 5 years or ever. Personally I think the worldview was a worldview of Survival of the Fittest like in the battle of the Trex and Kong. It also had a few bad scenes which they didn't need and some bad language. I wouldn't recommend seeing it more then once every 5 years or so. It got kind of long, I think some of the scenes could have been much shorter. The best thing about the movie was the scenery! All I have to say about the scenery is... WOW $\:D/$

kellyj · Post by **kellyj** » Tue Dec 27, 2005 1:48 pm

I haven't seen the movie yet but i want to. But my youth pastor saw it and he thought that it was amazing but there were a couple of disturbing scences.

Larry The Pickle · Post by **Larry The Pickle** » Tue Dec 27, 2005 8:27 pm

JesusFreak777 wrote: though it was a little long in places...like when Kong was fighting the dinosaurs...that went on FOREVER

That was good! I'm glad they didn't cut anything out!

^^^^ Yes you should definately go see it in theatres! And there were some really good freaky parts, like the bug canyon! EEK!!!!!!

The Town of Odyssey

KING KONG trailer!