|
|
| Page 3 of 3 |
-=Cartoon=-
VIP Member
Posts: 8823
Location: South Pacific Ocean
|
 Posted: Mon, 19th Dec 2005 00:18 Post subject: |
|
 |
they dont show him loading onto the boat in the first movie...
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon, 19th Dec 2005 02:33 Post subject: |
|
|
| fisk wrote: | It seems it's a commercial failure.
|
How did you come to that conclusion? Granted it's opening day in america wasn't as spectacular as expected, but it's still kicking ass internationally.
"Techniclly speaking, Beta-Manboi didnt inject Burberry_Massi with Benz, he injected him with liquid that had air bubbles in it, which caused benz." - House M.D
"Faith without logic is the same as knowledge without understanding; meaningless"
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon, 19th Dec 2005 03:32 Post subject: |
|
|
yup plus if you look at the reasons... it was a wednesday opening at a dodgey time. In places like NZ it raked in loadsa money from only a few cinemas (about 100 i think).
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon, 19th Dec 2005 07:12 Post subject: |
|
|
saw the move yesterday, was really good, wouldve been alot better without the first hour imo,
just way too boring.
hope they do a recut-extended edition like with sin city, just cut the part before they arrive at the island to 20 mins a most, and add the scenes that were missing compared to the 1933 original. i was really surprised some of these scenes from the original were completely omitted,
hence i m sure theyre gonna be included in the extendedn edition.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon, 19th Dec 2005 13:18 Post subject: |
|
|
Yeah, once they're on the island everything goes insane. I loved it, although I was really tired, so I almost fell asleep during the first hour, the second hour woke me up!
I thought Kong was amazingly well done, the emotion he showed was fantastic.
"Techniclly speaking, Beta-Manboi didnt inject Burberry_Massi with Benz, he injected him with liquid that had air bubbles in it, which caused benz." - House M.D
"Faith without logic is the same as knowledge without understanding; meaningless"
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon, 19th Dec 2005 16:58 Post subject: |
|
|
Yeah the first half hour are really boring, didn't even watched it, so I skipped to the part where they arrived at the island where the movie starts to get interesting...
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fisk
Posts: 9145
Location: Von Oben
|
| Posted: Wed, 21st Dec 2005 13:15 Post subject: |
|
|
| AnimalMother wrote: | | fisk wrote: | It seems it's a commercial failure.
|
How did you come to that conclusion? Granted it's opening day in america wasn't as spectacular as expected, but it's still kicking ass internationally. |
I just related my statement to an article I read, where the movie didn't sell even remotely as well as the studio had expected. Seeing the budget of the film, they're worried. But if you want to debate whether the article, and the statement from the production studio is false, go ahead.
Yes, yes I'm back.
Somewhat.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed, 21st Dec 2005 14:39 Post subject: |
|
|
| fisk wrote: | | AnimalMother wrote: | | fisk wrote: | It seems it's a commercial failure.
|
How did you come to that conclusion? Granted it's opening day in america wasn't as spectacular as expected, but it's still kicking ass internationally. |
I just related my statement to an article I read, where the movie didn't sell even remotely as well as the studio had expected. Seeing the budget of the film, they're worried. But if you want to debate whether the article, and the statement from the production studio is false, go ahead. |
The debate is more about your statement being false. You branded it a commercial failure based on one article, bairly two weeks post-premiere, which is presumptuous to say the least.
"Techniclly speaking, Beta-Manboi didnt inject Burberry_Massi with Benz, he injected him with liquid that had air bubbles in it, which caused benz." - House M.D
"Faith without logic is the same as knowledge without understanding; meaningless"
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GP Force
Posts: 861
Location: Hair today, gone tomorrow
|
| Posted: Tue, 27th Dec 2005 18:27 Post subject: |
|
|
| SycoShaman wrote: | | Macknu wrote: | | SycoShaman wrote: |
Why post? Cuz I fuckin can and yes, to tell ppl i dont like it  |
So youve seen it since you say you dont like it?
First you make stupid post that the cgi suck without even seing the movie and now this?  |
No, I said from what ive seen on the commercials, the cgi does suck. It may turn out to be awesome, but from what ive seen it doesnt look good...also, the storyline, about a giant ape, isnt all that appealing to me, wtf is wrong with that?
yet, I did say Im prolly gunna end up going to theatre to see it...
and yes, I can post about something i dont like - like tons of other ppl do. dont like it, dont fuckin read, much less reply and jump on the band wagon... |
PJ mae a new line in LOTR... I didn't think anyone would top that.. until I saw King Kong on the cinema.
King kong, slimy insects, airplanes... all were unbeliavble good looking
I'd say King Kong is the next best thing since LOTR... of course old movies that started the genre like : T2 etc still look good even today..
Syco, you should buy a ticket ,it's worth it 
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SycoShaman
VIP Master Jedi
Posts: 24468
Location: Toronto, Canada
|
| Posted: Wed, 28th Dec 2005 02:44 Post subject: |
|
|
Well, I have wanted to see it...but none of my friends or the girls I deal with, want to see it
Im not going to the movies alone I will for sure fall asleep. I usually fall asleep anyway, while Im with someone, nevermind by myself.
I "saw" SWAT 3 times in the theatre, each time I feel asleep in the first 20 minutes. Same with LOTR trilogy. Went to see each movie in the theatre and I couldnt even last 30 fuckin mins. had to wait till they came out on dvd so I could watch em
I mean fuck, u cant smoke or drink in the theatre, i dont really like popcorn and candy and shit - i'd rather have a nice veal sandwich or some cold cuts or something and then a nice cold beer to wash it down...once the open a deli/theatre/bar all in one combo, then I'll spend more money going to the movies
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 5th Jan 2006 08:38 Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fisk
Posts: 9145
Location: Von Oben
|
| Posted: Sat, 14th Jan 2006 04:07 Post subject: |
|
|
| AnimalMother wrote: | | fisk wrote: | | AnimalMother wrote: |
How did you come to that conclusion? Granted it's opening day in america wasn't as spectacular as expected, but it's still kicking ass internationally. |
I just related my statement to an article I read, where the movie didn't sell even remotely as well as the studio had expected. Seeing the budget of the film, they're worried. But if you want to debate whether the article, and the statement from the production studio is false, go ahead. |
The debate is more about your statement being false. You branded it a commercial failure based on one article, bairly two weeks post-premiere, which is presumptuous to say the least. |
Nope, the first week nearly always determines the rest of the sales. And even now, far down the road, this hasn't sold as much as the studios had hoped it would sell the first weeks.
Any how:
This movie really is a shallow joke. Pretty decent CGI, pretty cool audio. A cool fight scene with Kong and T-Rex, plus a pretty nasty scene with all the bugs in the ravine.
The rest is one sigh-fest of a too damn long movie.
4/10
Yes, yes I'm back.
Somewhat.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat, 14th Jan 2006 10:08 Post subject: |
|
|
| fisk wrote: | | AnimalMother wrote: | | fisk wrote: |
I just related my statement to an article I read, where the movie didn't sell even remotely as well as the studio had expected. Seeing the budget of the film, they're worried. But if you want to debate whether the article, and the statement from the production studio is false, go ahead. |
The debate is more about your statement being false. You branded it a commercial failure based on one article, bairly two weeks post-premiere, which is presumptuous to say the least. |
Nope, the first week nearly always determines the rest of the sales. And even now, far down the road, this hasn't sold as much as the studios had hoped it would sell the first weeks.
Any how:
This movie really is a shallow joke. Pretty decent CGI, pretty cool audio. A cool fight scene with Kong and T-Rex, plus a pretty nasty scene with all the bugs in the ravine.
The rest is one sigh-fest of a too damn long movie.
4/10 |
Why don't we start being realistic ? People bash this movie because they think it makes them cool and popular. If you want to bitch, make sure you bitch (for the) right (reasons).
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fisk
Posts: 9145
Location: Von Oben
|
| Posted: Sat, 14th Jan 2006 16:52 Post subject: |
|
|
| Bitching wrote: | | Why don't we start being realistic ? People bash this movie because they think it makes them cool and popular. If you want to bitch, make sure you bitch (for the) right (reasons). |
"Why don't we start being realistic?"
How about you stop making excuses for not being able to confront the fact that other people didn't appreciate something you liked. Disliking the movie has absolutely nothing to do with "being cool and popular" (God! What an asinine line of fanboy-defense).
Also, in terms of "bitching", you're the very epitaph of the word, stop throwing yourself around the house of glass.
As for "right" reasons, this movie production has so much weakness - only a fanboy could ever want to defend it.
Here is my more to the point review of this movie:
| Quote: | King Kong is Peter Jackson's dream - in a way, he always liked this movie as a child, and now he wants to do it himself. Much like Lord of the Rings, the problem is that King Kong isn't much of a movie to start with. And unfortunately Peter doesn't manage to save that.
There is too much in this movie that makes it shallow, the characters are shallow, and most of the acting is rudimentary, at best. The way the lead characters make their decisions, isn't at all presented, or motivates the audience to sympathize with their choices. Which makes the experience more of a visual roller-coaster, than a movie driven by character background, story, and dramaturgy.
King Kong is, at most - visual and audio effects at it's best. For neither Jack Black's shallow depiction of the main director (which screams of a paraphrase of PJ himself), a nerd visionary with Ed Wood-vibes. Or Adrien Brody (the established theater script writer) manages to make you, at all interested in the first third of the movie.
The story is presented in a very hasty way, where it feels like Peter doesn't really care much for characters, or build-up. The way it's made, it feels like he's only interested in Kong, and doesn't really use his otherwise cinematic prowess in building up the atmosphere up to that. And even after seeing Kong, that's not much to give the audience any way.
King Kong falls even before it starts, really. To make, essentially Jurassic Park, with a love crazed giant Gorilla, in the first place, doesn't really scream: "Interesting!" at you. Peter really needed to kill his darlings with this one, and kept his love for this movie to himself.
Despite trying to give a reference to Heart of Darkness, and a couple of small homages to Coppola's Apocalypse Now, this doesn't really become anything other than a mediocre "Island of Dr. Moreau", "Jurassic Park"-esque film. Why it has received so much audience positive feedback (and amazing IMDb-score) is hardly due to the quality of the movie itself. But the trust of the director.
Peter, I forgive you for making this movie. But if you make another side-step like this, you'll disappear as soon as I can say: "Kong". |
And the very memorable top-10 reasons for not liking this movie:
| IMDb wrote: | 10. The time wasting, overly long, irrelevant plot line surrounding Ann Darrow, the old man, and the theater getting closed down. Not pertinent to the story.
9. The CGI nerd focus on the spinning airplane wheels on the fighter planes. Someone said "Isn't this the coolest thing you've ever seen?". It only lasted a few seconds, but it was there only because some GIGANTIC nerd wanted it in. Guess what? It's NOT cool.
8. The plot line surrounding Jimmy and Mr. Hayes. Unnecessary, irrelevant, and ultimately unresolved. Why was Hayes protective of Jimmy? Did Jimmy go on to make something of himself? We never know. Why did anyone have to know he read "Heart of Darkness" or any of the other nonsense that was discussed between them? Total waste of time, stalls the story.
7. Kong violently shaking Ann around after he gets to his home turf, and her suffering no ill effects. She'd be not only injured, but dead. Kong was supposed to be gentle with Ann, duh. Totally missed the point.
6. The time wasting, overly long, irritating scenes where Kong repeatedly roars for no good reason. CGI nerds/effects people are responsible, I'm certain. They obviously took over the whole movie. Probable discussion: "Isn't the roar the coolest thing you've ever seen/heard? Let's use it 47 times!"
5. The completely ludicrous scene where Kong smashes the stolen taxi but Driscoll (inside) isn't even scratched. Guess what? That's right, he'd be dead. Come on, you can at least TRY to make this thing believable.
4. The completely awful scene where Kong fights 3 T-Rexes while holding Anne in his hand. For the love of God, she'd be killed instantly. At least the original had the sense to have him put her down to fight the tyrannosaurus, a key element ignored in the remake, here and elsewhere in the movie. They also miss the point about the planes holding back when Kong is holding Ann, see above. Point missed.
And the top 3…
3. The incredibly preposterous and insulting scene where Jimmy shoots all the CGI nerd created insects off of Driscoll. Shuts his eyes while firing, and hits all the bugs. It wasn't just reminiscent of Jar-Jar Binks in the big battle with the gun stuck on his tail, it WAS Jar-Jar Binks in the big battle with the gun stuck on his tail. Totally unacceptable.
2. The even more preposterous and more insulting and asinine Brontosaurus stampede scene. This one almost takes the cake for worst scene in movie history, if not for the next one. Beyond ridiculous, totally unbelievable, video-game quality. Graphics cheesy and unrealistic. CGI nerds were probably slapping high fives seeing how many asinine near-miss, "Raptor almost gets the character before being stomped by the brontosaurus", Tom and Jerry scenes they could create. Asinine beyond belief.
1. The horrible, horrible ridiculous scene where Kong and Ann et all are falling through the vines, getting caught repeatedly by new vines swinging out, not getting injured, falling again, caught by another swinging vine, not getting injured, etc. Vines pendulum-like swinging with the monster almost gobbling Ann up, only to be just out of reach, repeatedly. This didn't belong in "King Kong", it belonged in "Donkey Kong Jr.". |
Yes, yes I'm back.
Somewhat.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat, 14th Jan 2006 17:06 Post subject: |
|
|
| fisk wrote: | | Bitching wrote: | | Why don't we start being realistic ? People bash this movie because they think it makes them cool and popular. If you want to bitch, make sure you bitch (for the) right (reasons). |
"Why don't we start being realistic?"
How about you stop making excuses for not being able to confront the fact that other people didn't appreciate something you liked. Disliking the movie has absolutely nothing to do with "being cool and popular" (God! What an asinine line of fanboy-defense).
Also, in terms of "bitching", you're the very epitaph of the word, stop throwing yourself around the house of glass.
As for "right" reasons, this movie production has so much weakness - only a fanboy could ever want to defend it.
Here is my more to the point review of this movie:
| Quote: | King Kong is Peter Jackson's dream - in a way, he always liked this movie as a child, and now he wants to do it himself. Much like Lord of the Rings, the problem is that King Kong isn't much of a movie to start with. And unfortunately Peter doesn't manage to save that.
There is too much in this movie that makes it shallow, the characters are shallow, and most of the acting is rudimentary, at best. The way the lead characters make their decisions, isn't at all presented, or motivates the audience to sympathize with their choices. Which makes the experience more of a visual roller-coaster, than a movie driven by character background, story, and dramaturgy.
King Kong is, at most - visual and audio effects at it's best. For neither Jack Black's shallow depiction of the main director (which screams of a paraphrase of PJ himself), a nerd visionary with Ed Wood-vibes. Or Adrien Brody (the established theater script writer) manages to make you, at all interested in the first third of the movie.
The story is presented in a very hasty way, where it feels like Peter doesn't really care much for characters, or build-up. The way it's made, it feels like he's only interested in Kong, and doesn't really use his otherwise cinematic prowess in building up the atmosphere up to that. And even after seeing Kong, that's not much to give the audience any way.
King Kong falls even before it starts, really. To make, essentially Jurassic Park, with a love crazed giant Gorilla, in the first place, doesn't really scream: "Interesting!" at you. Peter really needed to kill his darlings with this one, and kept his love for this movie to himself.
Despite trying to give a reference to Heart of Darkness, and a couple of small homages to Coppola's Apocalypse Now, this doesn't really become anything other than a mediocre "Island of Dr. Moreau", "Jurassic Park"-esque film. Why it has received so much audience positive feedback (and amazing IMDb-score) is hardly due to the quality of the movie itself. But the trust of the director.
Peter, I forgive you for making this movie. But if you make another side-step like this, you'll disappear as soon as I can say: "Kong". |
And the very memorable top-10 reasons for not liking this movie:
| IMDb wrote: | 10. The time wasting, overly long, irrelevant plot line surrounding Ann Darrow, the old man, and the theater getting closed down. Not pertinent to the story.
9. The CGI nerd focus on the spinning airplane wheels on the fighter planes. Someone said "Isn't this the coolest thing you've ever seen?". It only lasted a few seconds, but it was there only because some GIGANTIC nerd wanted it in. Guess what? It's NOT cool.
8. The plot line surrounding Jimmy and Mr. Hayes. Unnecessary, irrelevant, and ultimately unresolved. Why was Hayes protective of Jimmy? Did Jimmy go on to make something of himself? We never know. Why did anyone have to know he read "Heart of Darkness" or any of the other nonsense that was discussed between them? Total waste of time, stalls the story.
7. Kong violently shaking Ann around after he gets to his home turf, and her suffering no ill effects. She'd be not only injured, but dead. Kong was supposed to be gentle with Ann, duh. Totally missed the point.
6. The time wasting, overly long, irritating scenes where Kong repeatedly roars for no good reason. CGI nerds/effects people are responsible, I'm certain. They obviously took over the whole movie. Probable discussion: "Isn't the roar the coolest thing you've ever seen/heard? Let's use it 47 times!"
5. The completely ludicrous scene where Kong smashes the stolen taxi but Driscoll (inside) isn't even scratched. Guess what? That's right, he'd be dead. Come on, you can at least TRY to make this thing believable.
4. The completely awful scene where Kong fights 3 T-Rexes while holding Anne in his hand. For the love of God, she'd be killed instantly. At least the original had the sense to have him put her down to fight the tyrannosaurus, a key element ignored in the remake, here and elsewhere in the movie. They also miss the point about the planes holding back when Kong is holding Ann, see above. Point missed.
And the top 3…
3. The incredibly preposterous and insulting scene where Jimmy shoots all the CGI nerd created insects off of Driscoll. Shuts his eyes while firing, and hits all the bugs. It wasn't just reminiscent of Jar-Jar Binks in the big battle with the gun stuck on his tail, it WAS Jar-Jar Binks in the big battle with the gun stuck on his tail. Totally unacceptable.
2. The even more preposterous and more insulting and asinine Brontosaurus stampede scene. This one almost takes the cake for worst scene in movie history, if not for the next one. Beyond ridiculous, totally unbelievable, video-game quality. Graphics cheesy and unrealistic. CGI nerds were probably slapping high fives seeing how many asinine near-miss, "Raptor almost gets the character before being stomped by the brontosaurus", Tom and Jerry scenes they could create. Asinine beyond belief.
1. The horrible, horrible ridiculous scene where Kong and Ann et all are falling through the vines, getting caught repeatedly by new vines swinging out, not getting injured, falling again, caught by another swinging vine, not getting injured, etc. Vines pendulum-like swinging with the monster almost gobbling Ann up, only to be just out of reach, repeatedly. This didn't belong in "King Kong", it belonged in "Donkey Kong Jr.". |
|
Sure, start calling people fanboys when they say something you don't want to hear (or see). I agree, people may not like it, sure. That problem will never go away, so why the hell should I go and defend it if I know that that very same problem exists ? The fact is you giving it a 4/10 is totally unacceptable, even if it's not as good as many people say and/or think. Man, a 4 means a movie totally sucks and all that bullshit that goes along with it except for maybe one or two good scenes and the credits.
That's what I mean with "start being realistic". Judge it like a normal person would or just stop go seeing movies, man.
Man, even The Godfather had visual faults and mistakes and you don't see people judging the movie on that. Wake up, you idiot !
Using some lines from IMDb is also very good. Now I see it's really your opinion and that you noticed those mistakes all by yourself. Excellent man. No, you wish.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
deelix
PDIP Member
Posts: 32062
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Sat, 14th Jan 2006 17:12 Post subject: |
|
|
From bash.org
<Leitari> omg
<Leitari> king kong is long
<Leitari> ^^
<Leitari> my ass hurts
<Leitari> wait
<Leitari> that didnt sound right
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fisk
Posts: 9145
Location: Von Oben
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fisk
Posts: 9145
Location: Von Oben
|
| Posted: Sat, 14th Jan 2006 18:59 Post subject: |
|
|
| Bitching wrote: | | The fact is you giving it a 4/10 is totally unacceptable, |
The score doesn't really tell the story. That's just the sum of the impression I got from the movie. I really like P.J. as a director, but I think the movie was worse than the sum of it's parts.
There really were some memorable moments, but all-in-all, it's a mediocre movie, in my opinion of course.
| Quote: | | Judge it like a normal person would or just stop go seeing movies, man. |
I am a normal person, despite yours and AnimalMother's benign cries. And I've judged it as such. You don't approve of my opinion?
Sorry, sometimes life's a bitch, but you should know that... seeing as how you bitch so much.
| Quote: | | [...]even The Godfather [...] |
Wait, stop right there. You're telling me to wake up, in the same sentence as mentioning King Kong and The Godfather... that must be some sort of irony imposed onto yourself by your subconscious. Ha-ha! Hilarious.
Yes, yes I'm back.
Somewhat.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hahe
Posts: 1685
Location: US
|
| Posted: Sat, 14th Jan 2006 19:07 Post subject: |
|
|
Fisk......it's a movie......with a 25ft ape.....and dinosaurs on an island in 1933. I'm pretty sure the realistic aspect went out the window the second the movie started.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fisk
Posts: 9145
Location: Von Oben
|
| Posted: Sat, 14th Jan 2006 19:24 Post subject: |
|
|
| hahe wrote: | | Fisk......it's a movie......with a 25ft ape.....and dinosaurs on an island in 1933. I'm pretty sure the realistic aspect went out the window the second the movie started. |
I agree with you, wholeheartedly. Realism isn't what you expect of a movie such as this. But you need to separate -realism- and believability.
I believe that when you make a movie about, for instance, King Kong. You want to portray a convincing message of him. You want to make him as -believable- as possible.
Yes, he isn't real, and no - it isn't realistic that a 25 feet Gorilla would be fighting Tyrannosaurus Rex. But do you not agree that there are some boundries of believability here? If Kong started to talk, ordered a hot dog over a cell phone, and then flew to Mars, would you still argue that realism isn't the factor here?
Yes, yes I'm back.
Somewhat.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 15th Jan 2006 21:03 Post subject: |
|
|
Terrible waste.
Finally saw the movie and that pretty much sums it up. The trend seems to be that if something works then more of it should work even better. Hey why have one T-rex when you can have three. Lets put the 'good' guys in the middle of hundreds of totally fake looking spiders in the name of action.
CGI in this movie sucked but that is not the point. Directors seem to be doing things with fx just because they can do it.
I saw the Dino de Laurentis version a long time ago and I cried when Kong died. This time around I guess I felt just plain relief that the movie was finished.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Page 3 of 3 |
All times are GMT + 1 Hour |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB 2.0.8 © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
|
|
 |
|
