Critics review KONG -- first one says its jaw dropping

Post by **Primula Baggins** » Wed Dec 07, 2005 6:56 pm

The word coming out of screenings is that it's got genuine emotional power and some really good performances—much like what were (for me) the greatest strengths of PJ's LotR.

It won't have the power of LotR for me, of course, because it isn't a story I've loved all my life and it doesn't have anything like the depth of Tolkien. But it should be a fun ride.

Post by **Thewhitetree** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 5:36 pm

BRILLIANT!

I warn you though, the score sucks badly. Other than that I agree with what one review said: "They don't really make movies like this anymore; I'm not sure if they ever did."

Definately the best movie of the year.

Post by **sauronsfinger** » Fri Dec 16, 2005 3:00 pm

First day box office grosses were low.

'Kong' conks out on Day 1

BY ROBERT DOMINGUEZ
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER

"King Kong" isn't the king of the box office - yet.
Director Peter Jackson's $207 million remake of the 1933 classic didn't even break the $10 million mark in its first day in theaters.

Opening early Wednesday morning, "Kong" earned $9.7 million in 3,567 theaters nationwide - making it the 21st-best Wednesday opening.

"Spider-Man 2," which holds the record for best Wednesday, made $40 million when it debuted in June 2004.

Universal Studios, "Kong's" distributor, had no comment. But industry analysts expect business to pick up considerably over the weekend.

The grosses "are not up there with some of the lofty expectations, but the bulk of the audience will be coming out on Friday and Saturday," said Gitesh Pandya, editor of boxofficeguru.com.

"Unlike some movies like the 'The Lord of the Rings' [trilogy], there's not much of a built-in audience that needs to see it the first day. There's tons of business ahead for 'Kong.' "

"Titanic," the top-grossing movie of all time with $1.8 billion in ticket sales worldwide, didn't fare particularly well initially, either. It only took in $28.6 million in 2,674 screens during its opening weekend in December 1997.

Box office analyst Paul Dergarabedian said part of the blame for "Kong's" less-than-record-breaking numbers is its lengthy running time - three hours and seven minutes.

"It is a long movie, and that limits the number of showings per day," said Dergarabedian, president of Exhibitor Relations.

"But this is a movie that's going to be around a while, and as the buzz builds, so will the audience."

Post by **Padme** » Fri Dec 16, 2005 5:28 pm

One thing about PJ, he likes making a loooong movie.

Post by **Thewhitetree** » Sat Dec 17, 2005 11:10 pm

And I had no problem with it being long. Unlike friggin' titanic. There was no moment in Kong where I thought 'OK get on with this'. It was sheer brilliance.

Post by **sauronsfinger** » Mon Dec 19, 2005 2:14 pm

KONG was a three hour movie that seemed like it was a two hour movie. The more I think about it, my favorite scene was the forzen pond in Central Park scene. Something new and different and every sweet.

Post by **Alatar** » Mon Dec 19, 2005 2:58 pm

Very disappointing. Overlong, poor cgi in many places and a truly abysmal score.

What a shame.

Post by **yovargas** » Mon Dec 19, 2005 9:46 pm

I only thought the CGI was poor during the stampede and maybe a couple of the early ocean shots. Otherwise, it was great.

Post by **Thewhitetree** » Mon Dec 19, 2005 9:46 pm

Length was no problem. Perhaps some things could be changed but overall with the changes it would still be around 2hr 45 mins. The score was a noise-filler and nothing else. That was the greatest shame...

Post by **sauronsfinger** » Wed Dec 21, 2005 4:56 pm

My four year old grandson is mine for the afternoon and he wants to see KONG. I will skip the first hour plus the intense scenes of the natives on Skull Island because I think they would scare the daylights out of him. But we will watch the dinosaurs and rampage through NYCity. He just loves to see things broken and destroyed.

Full review from him will follow.

Post by **Ethel** » Thu Dec 22, 2005 12:42 am

I enjoyed it. I wouldn't call it a great movie, but I didn't want my money back. I didn't mind the length so much. Kong himself was wonderful. I agree about the dodgy CG during the dinosaur stampede. A lot of it was pretty OTT, but you expect that with PJ. Can't have 8 dinosaurs; got to have 800. (What do they all eat? Giant bugs? What do the giant bugs eat? Dinosaurs? How about the giant sucker worms - they seemed to go for manflesh and there can't have been much of it... But this is reality logic, not movie logic.)

I thought Naomi Watts was great as Ann, and I loved the scenes between Ann and Kong. I was amused by Adrien Brody as Action Hero - with that cubist nose and those soulful eyes, he just doesn't look the part. But he was fine.

I actually enjoyed the first hour on the boat best. Wouldn't have minded staying with Tramp Steamer to Nowhere movie, but of course that would not have allowed for action and critters. Kept expecting something to come of the byplay between the first mate and the feral sailor kid, but nothing ever did - was that an editing problem?

One reason I probably won't see it again - I have terrible vertigo. The Empire State Building sequence is torture for someone like me. Sure, go ahead, climb up that ladder in your silver high heels because you like the big monkey. You too, Jack. I'll just put my hands over my eyes.

Sun Dec 25, 2005 8:10 am

I liked it.

Post by **WampusCat** » Mon Dec 26, 2005 9:49 pm

It didn't seem too long for me, but I would have cut the giant bugs anyway. I didn't feel they added anything, and watching the kid fire at random and just happen to hit bugs instead of Driscoll ... that was too much suspension of belief for me.

I preferred the quiet, character-building parts to the action sequences, although the fights and mayhem were entertaining.

The natives were the creepiest inhabitants of the island. Just thinking about them gives me the shakes. Stampeding or toothy dinosaurs weren't nearly as scary. So it seemed odd when they vanished and never returned.

.

Post by **Alatar** » Mon Dec 26, 2005 10:06 pm

I watched it again last night with Mrs Alatar. She agreed with my assessment. Watching it again, the first hour and last hour are definitely the best of the movie. The Kong vs T-Rex fight was far too long and could have been completely cut down to the final face off between Kong and the last dinosaur. That scene was pure magic, but felt superfluous after the previous twenty minutes of vine swinging and multi-dinosaur mayhem. The spider pit should have stayed cut. The Dino stampede should have never been filmed. Theres half an hour of bloat in those three sections that just kill the movie. By the end, when you should be completely emotionally invested in the characters you just don't care any more. Mrs. Alatar said that at the end when Darrow was standing on the top of the ESB alone, instead of feeling the emotion, she was wondering how the hell she wasn't blown off the top. I know how she felt, but the problem wasn't created there, it was created about 2 hours previously. Once the Dino Stampede has taken you so completely out of the movie it takes effort to re-invest, then you get hit by the twenty minute T-Rex fight and the Spider Pit. You struggle to get back into it and Jack rescues Darrow with the convenient assistance of a bunch of giant bats, one of whom he uses as a hang-glider. It's this middle hour that kills the emotional punch at the end.

But hey, PJ's gonna make a fortune, so what the hell do I know!

Tue Dec 27, 2005 4:05 am

I thought it was flawed and brilliant. In other words, a Peter Jackson movie.

If I had a major complaint it would be that they created too much tension. For someone who had not read any spoilers, it certainly kept me on the edge of my seat for long periods, so much so that I left the theater with a stiff neck. And I agree that it was ridiculous having Jimmy shoot the bugs off of the first fate and that the stampede was silly. But I did not think it was too long. I was surprised at how quickly it passed. And I thought the fight against the T Rex's was great; I wouldn't have cut any of that. But what really amazed me was how successful they were at creating a real relationship between Kong and Ann. That alone makes the movie a triumph in my eyes. Just as with the LOTR films, I'm not sure that anyone else could have pulled it off.

Post by **Griffon64** » Tue Dec 27, 2005 1:28 pm

Ethel - the vertigo also got to me - garn, do they HAVE to show all those skyscrapers RIGHT from the top? Does she have to stand so close to the EDGE in HIGH HEELS? That was almost worse than the bugs and critters munching on the hapless crew, and I closed my eyes for some of that, thanks. I went with a group of friends and the guy next to me is KNOWN for having a dark sort of fascination with horror and gore, and even HE went "Ewwwwww!" at some stage where I thankfully had my eyes closed and thought "Ah good. If that grosses him out, I definitely am better off not seeing it!" It was somewhere before that thing with the extendable teeth gulped down Andy Serkins. I opened my eyes right as he looked up as this thing started on the top of his head, yuck brrrrr.

WampusCat - I also wondered where the natives went to. And the masses of decaying skeletons round about their haunts ... how do you LIVE like that? Brrrrr ick no!

To give my 2 cents, I would have cut some of the giant bugs scenes. But that is because I don't do very well with spiders, and I was just waiting for a set of big bug legs to belong to a SPIDER!!!!!

The middle stretch got a bit tiresome where you would have poor damsel escape, breathe sigh of relief, turn around, and whaaaaahh!!! another monster!!! Flee flee flee!

Apart from that, it was a movie that surprised me. A lot more heart, and a lot more tolerable, than I thought it would be. I'll watch it again, if only to see, on a teeny TV screen that isn't so scary, what made my friend go "Ewwwwwwww!"

Post by **yovargas** » Tue Dec 27, 2005 4:04 pm

IMO, the dinasour vs Kong fight sequence is the best action sequence of the year. Like V, I wouldn't have cut a second of it. There's a sense of giddy, kid-in-a-sandbox fun to this whole sequence along with the bug scene and if you're in on the ride with PJ, it's a whole lotta fun. Despite some of the bloat, this is easily the funnest movie of the year.

Oh, and

for Kong on ice.

Post by **Snowdog** » Tue Dec 27, 2005 7:12 pm

As a fan of the original 1933 movie, I thought PJ did a great job in capturing the feel of that movie with the setting in 1932. He kept his "artistic license" in check and really made a good remake!

Post by **Padme** » Wed Dec 28, 2005 6:25 pm

I went and saw it yesterday. It was a good movie, not the best I have seen, but a good movie. The dino stampeed was a bit much. The bugs were gross. And I kept thinking, like others, what the heck is she doing climbing up the building in high heels. Plus it was December in New York and she was in a not much more than a nighty dressed up as a dress and yet she was not cold at all.