Critics review KONG -- first one says its jaw dropping

[sauronsfinger]

Those of who fell in love with Peter Jackson as a film maker because of his three LOTR films, perhaps wondered it it were more JRRT or more PJ that made them great. Could Jackson do it with other material? Here is your first answer.

This gorilla of a film is blockbuster of the year
by BAZ BAMIGBOYE, Daily Mail


King Kong: The film stars Naomi Watts


Just over a year ago, Oscar-winning film-maker Peter Jackson stood on the mammoth Skull Island set he had built on a peninsula in New Zealand and told me why he loved King Kong.
Speaking about Merian Cooper's classic 1933 movie, Jackson said: "The original Kong is a wonderful blend - probably the most perfect blend - of escapism and adventure, mystery and romance. It does everything an escapist movie should do: it takes you places you are never going to see and gives you experiences you are never going to have."

Jackson's words came back to me as I sat in the back row at the Loews Cinema complex on New York's West 68th Street this week, watching the first screening of his new version of Kong.


He may not have known it at the time, but Jackson could just as well have been talking about his own extraordinary remake of the movie that inspired him to become a director when he saw it one Friday night on TV when he was just nine years old.

The very next morning, Jackson started creating stop-motion films using Plasticine.

This time round, the director had some much bigger toys - 21st-century humdingers - to play with.

And he has made a picture I can only describe as jaw-droppingly brilliant: the most entertaining blockbuster movie this year.

But all this monkey business wouldn't amount to a hill of beans if the movie didn't have a heart, and boy, does it.

Kong's the last of his race. He has withdrawn into himself, and the occasional sacrificial native (he plays with them for a while and then tosses them away like chicken wings) is merely a distraction from the pain of his lonely life.

Then along comes beauty, in the shape of Ann Darrow, a Depression-era vaudeville performer living on the breadline, who lands a role in a madcap director's fantasy feature.

Ann, as played by Naomi Watts, is pretty weary herself. And somehow, the great ape and the lovely, lost woman recognise they are kindred spirits under the skin. Or, in his case, fur.

There's a beautiful moment with Kong sitting on top of a mountain, Ann in the palm of his hand, both watching the sunset. I actually heard one tough broad of a movie executive sobbing. Jackson evokes such a sense of empathy for his beast that Kleenex should be sold along with the popcorn.

King Kong truly is an 8,000lb gorilla of a movie. I'm still marvelling at a scene where a herd of brachiosaurus stampede as they are pursued by predators with teeth the size of carving knives.

Then, just when you think such a sequence can't be topped, Kong pounds to rescue his damsel in distress when some hungry velociraptors mistake her for a snack.

An almighty battle ensues and it's at this point Kong goes from super monster to super hero in Ann's eyes.

Jack Black, who plays preening, self-promoting movie maker Carl Denham, told me that, in the original movie, his character was older and more of a "kick-ass action hero".

"This Denham is darker," he says.

"He has an obsession with accomplishment. He's got insecurities and has this fear of not accomplishing something great before he dies.

"Fran Walsh [Jackson's life partner] told me my Denham has to have a little bit of Willy Loman from Death Of A Salesman to him. There's fear and arousal on my part. Certainly that's what Denham is feeling when he captures Kong on Skull Island."

Jack tells me all children - "at least all boys" - love King Kong.

"He is the king of all the monsters, even better than Godzilla. Kong is stronger and smarter than Godzilla, who's just a stupid, slimy lizard."

He was referring to the original Kong and the gormless 1976 remake with Jessica Lange.

But I think Jackson's version, which he wrote with Fran Walsh and Philippa Boyens (the trio also adapted The Lord Of The Rings for the screen), is accessible to all.

I don't know what the rating in the UK will be for the film - which also features Jamie Bell, Adrien Brody, Thomas Kretschmann, Kyle Chandler and Colin Hanks - when it opens in the UK on December 15. (It will have its London gala next Thursday, December 8.) But it might be a bit much for tiny tots.

As I write this, I'm getting shivers thinking of the moment when Andy Serkis - who plays a double role, but more of that later, as they say - encounters a giant insect that extends itself horribly and slurps him down head first.

It terrified me, but then I'm the guy who, years ago, ran from a Manhattan apartment I'd rented because there were cockroaches in the oven. Forget roaches - the bugs in this movie are the size of Agas.

Serkis was at the screening, along with most of the cast. The Londonbased actor told me the final version had only been wrapped up this Monday.

Andy's two roles are that of ship's cook (his speciality is porridge al la walnuts) - and Kong.

He went to Rwanda for a few weeks to study the gorillas - in particular, to observe how they moved and communicated with each other.

Jackson had Andy act out Kong's role and then digitalised it, using the same technique employed with Gollum in the Lord Of The Rings films. Richard Taylor, Jackson's long-time technical collaborator, explained: "Today, as an audience, we crave an emotional relationship, so we used Andy to drive Kong. To make him convey the toughness of this giant silverback, but also to give a sense of empathy.

"In Lord Of The Rings, we used an orange ball to denote something the actors would be acting to, and we added the special effects later. Here, we used Andy or a series of sculptures of Kong's face."

The Kong busts took a long time to make. Just punching in the 40,000 yak hairs took three-andahalf weeks for each one.

Monday will be the world premiere of King Kong, with cinemas around New York's Times Square showing the movie.

Some critics will carp about its length - three hours - but for me, the time sped by.

Jackson opens his movie with Al Jolson singing I'm Sitting On Top Of The World. And that's where the director is - with the competition far, far below.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Thanks for sharing that, sf. I suspect that most of the people that liked LOTR will like Kong, and that most of the people that were put off by Jackson's excesses in those films will be even more put off by them here.

I for one am greatly looking for to it.

I am quite curious about the music, and how well it works. I still don't understand what PJ's disagreement with Howard Shore was about, and I would sure be interested in any thoughts that anyone had about that (cough*ttbk*cough).

[Whistler]

Excesses? I missed the excesses. Which scene were they in?

[Pearly Di]

Whistler, you're so cute.

I've seen both Kong trailers now and I think they're MARVELLOUS. This really looks like a thoroughly enjoyable, no-holds-barred, PJ-let-loose kinda film.

I really like Naomi Watts.

Looks like she's gonna scream as much as Frolijah did.

I don't mind PJ's excesses when it comes to King Kong.

They could be somewhat annoying when it came to Tolkien but then again, PJ also did achieve the sublime ...

[Queen_Beruthiel]

I suspect that most of the people that liked LOTR will like Kong, and that most of the people that were put off by Jackson's excesses in those films will be even more put off by them here.

Not at all.

I've said all along that I expect PJ's goofy (IMO) style to be well suited to the goofy Kong material. There'll be action, thrills, laughter, tears (not from me, perhaps ) and a dashing of comic yucky gore.

He was born to make this film. It should be a perfect match of director and material.

[Jnyusa]

That's what I was thinking, Queen B. I'm likely to enjoy Jackson's style more in King Kong than I did in LotR. But we saw the trailer at the Harry Potter movie, and I've got to say that those intercuts ....

My eyes needed a neck brace after watching the trailer. Hopefully that was just the trailer trying to cram in as much as possible, but I have a suspicion that it is much in Jackson's style to do rapid intercuts and the whole movie will be like that.

Jn

[Cerin]

I must agree, I think that whatever Peter Jackson does with Kong, it won't matter to me nearly as much. In fact, I'm looking forward to finally being able to be wildly enthusiastic about a PJ movie (such a nice man).

Although, I mean, wasn't the original pretty nearly perfect?

I wonder if they tried to add significances as the first remake did? (I didn't care for that movie at all.)

[TheTennisBallKid]

I am quite curious about the music, and how well it works. I still don't understand what PJ's disagreement with Howard Shore was about, and I would sure be interested in any thoughts that anyone had about that (cough*ttbk*cough).

Heh.


Besides the vague "creative differences" cited in the original press release, this tidbit (from a longer Variety article) is probably the closest we've gotten to hearing what actually happened:

Howard, a six-time Oscar nominee whose scores include "The Sixth Sense""The Sixth Sense" and "The Village," replaced Howard Shore as composer on the film. Shore -- whose cameo as the pit-band conductor during Kong's New York theater appearance survives the cut -- won three Oscars for his music for "Kong" director Peter JacksonPeter Jackson's "The Lord of the Rings" movies.

The last-minute change stunned the film-music community because of Shore's close collaboration with Jackson over nearly four years of work on the trilogy. Jackson's only public comment came in an Oct. 14 statement: "During the last few weeks, Howard and I came to realize that we had differing creative aspirations. ... Rather than waste time arguing with a friend and trying to unify our points of view, we decided amicably to let another composer score the film."

Sources say Shore recorded his unfinished "Kong" score for nine days (three in Berlin, six in Wellington with the New Zealand Symphony Orchestra). Shore and Howard declined interview requests, but sources say -- although Shore had been working on themes for months in advance -- post-production was running so late that he could not spend sufficient time with the edited film.

Unlike most film composers, Shore orchestrates and conducts his music. He averaged eight minutes of recording per day on the "Kong" score, none of which will be used. He has told friends that Jackson's press statement is essentially correct, that the decision to stop was not a Universal mandate (as had been widely speculated after the mid-October revelation that the film's running time had ballooned to three hours and that the studio was negotiating with Jackson about how to cover the extra $32 million required to finish the movie).

The relevant part is that Shore works by himself (unlike JNH, and most other film composers, who will have multiple orchestrators etc. to assist), PJ edits like a madman (meaning everything goes right down to the wire), and there wasn't enough time.

As is often the case in present day Hollywood (see also: Pirates Of The Carribbean; Troy), the music got the lousy end of the deal. Newton-Howard is generally regarded as a fine composer, but it doesn't take a lot of common sense to figure out that something he and an army of ghost writers and orchestrators turn out at breakneck speed will most likely not be as well crafted as something Shore worked on for months and months.

It's like getting rid of Weta a month and half before the film opens, and bringing ILM in to try and redo all the special effects.

I'll freely admit that music is a much larger part of the cinematic experience for me than most people, but I don't think that changes the fact that, ideally, the music should get just as much care as the CGI dinosaurs.

I expected better of PJ after LOTR.

It seems to have been an amicable split though, Shore still has a lengthy cameo. Which might be enough to get me to go see this, but I don't know...



ttbk

[Primula Baggins]

It sounds to me as if they had no choice at all. I'm certain Shore's score would have been much better, but it sounds as if it would not have been finished when it had to be. A brilliant score is a great asset, but missing a worldwide release date is a disaster.

I wonder . . . ttbk, do you think they might (assuming this is a huge success) have Shore finish the score later and do a DVD release with his score replacing Howard's, sometime down the road?

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Not a chance.

And yes, I know that I am not ttbk

[TheTennisBallKid]

A brilliant score is a great asset, but missing a worldwide release date is a disaster.

Which is where me and the rest of the world split ways with our priorities.

I wonder . . . ttbk, do you think they might (assuming this is a huge success) have Shore finish the score later and do a DVD release with his score replacing Howard's, sometime down the road?

Not a chance that they'd do a release where it replaced Howard's; possibly as an alternate track though, that's not unheard of...the fact that the score wasn't completely recorded, and the probable high cost that would involve make that unlikely though...

I hope against hope for a CD release though.



ttbk

[Primula Baggins]

I'm just not a score maven. I thought I had heard of a recent DVD release where a studio-imposed score was replaced with the one the director had wanted (that had been finished and in place). Of course, the expenses of that would be much less.

[cemthinae]

I'll freely admit that music is a much larger part of the cinematic experience for me than most people, but I don't think that changes the fact that, ideally, the music should get just as much care as the CGI dinosaurs.

This is why I adore you!

I agree wholeheartedly!

The movie looks good. I think I'll be taking the brothers to go see it.

[Padme]

I have heard good reviews on this also.

I hope its good, my son loves Kong.

[sauronsfinger]

In the end, howard Shore could not do the job in the time that was set aside for it. He was replaced. Thats the way the real world works.

Would it be realistic to postpone this film and miss the release date incurring more cost for the purpose of retaining Shore? Part of being a professional is to meet deadlines. I feel badly that this happened since I love the work that Shore didon LOTR. But this one does not seem the fault of Peter Jackson.

The three early reviews I have read do not seem disturbed by the change.

[Impenitent]

Padme and Sauronsfinger have his and hers avatars! So cute!

Erm...

Yes, my jaw dropped also. Is it unreasonable of me to admit that I wasn't expecting much from this movie? Yes, it is unreasonable of me. The trailer was very impressive and both my kids remembered it after HP was over (which is noteworthy as far as I'm concerned, because HP was THE long-anticipated film for them and that they remembered anything they saw before it is a wonder to me).

Hopes to have adequately covered her osgiliation

[Sassafras]

Teehee. I noticed, too, Imp.



Ahem.

King Kong.

I expect to be entertained.

However, I've read some glowing reviews. And the NY Times liked it, so that's something.

[Primula Baggins]

Some of the early reviews have been very positive—not just geek reviews, either.

One said it was more moving than LotR. Many seem to be raving about the overall quality of the film, and about Naomi Watts' performance.

I expected it to be fun, but PJ may have done it again.

[elfshadow]

I saw this trailer twice when I went to see Harry Potter, and I think that the movie will end up being a lot better than the trailers potrayed it as. I'm not a big fan of hugely dramatized action sequences, I usually base my opinions of a movie off of the emotions and thoughts it conveys. I like action, but trailers always show too much of it (trying to appeal to sensory perceptions ).

Still, I couldn't think of a better director for this movie than PJ. And I love Jack Black and Colin Hanks (they had terrific chemistry working together in "Orange County"). Adrien Brody and Naomi Watts are both wonderful actors, and of course Andy Serkis will be brilliant, as always. Can't wait to see it!

[Padme]

I am so ready to see if Jack Black can pull this off. I will be plenty happy if he did. I loved him in Shallow Hal.