- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
What’s everyone’s thoughts on King Kong (2005)
Posted on 6/29/20 at 12:54 am
Posted on 6/29/20 at 12:54 am
I thought it was incredible in 2005 in theaters when I was 15.
But it honestly feels like 3 movies and its too long. It was a passion project for Peter Jackson and he just tried to fit too much into it.
The journey to the island is too long and the actors are miscast. Adrian Brody and Jack Black in particular. The whole Jimmy and Mr Hays plot is not needed at all.
Once we make it to the island it’s an A movie though. Jackson is absolutely on point and his ability to pull off Spielberg-esque action scenes is top notch. The Kong vs V-Rex fight is still to me the best big monster fight I’ve ever seen, my jaw was on the floor in theaters for the first time. The CGI on Kong is still better than even Skull Island, and the bug scene is creepy AF.
Once we get back to NYC, even with Kong it drops back to a B movie because the human characters are just lacking for some reason. I still blame it on miscasting except for Naomi. Although it does have some great moments (1930s NYC CGI is again on point, and I love the soundtrack with the piano with Kong and Naomi) you’re falling asleep by then.
The CGI on Kong will last a lifetime, it’s that good. But the humans and the length drag down an otherwise awesome movie in my opinion. I’ll toss it on though for the island scenes any day of the week.
Sidenote: my mom dropped me and my buddy off at an 11 pm showing and was fricking pissed once she learned she had to pick us up at like 3 am lmao
But it honestly feels like 3 movies and its too long. It was a passion project for Peter Jackson and he just tried to fit too much into it.
The journey to the island is too long and the actors are miscast. Adrian Brody and Jack Black in particular. The whole Jimmy and Mr Hays plot is not needed at all.
Once we make it to the island it’s an A movie though. Jackson is absolutely on point and his ability to pull off Spielberg-esque action scenes is top notch. The Kong vs V-Rex fight is still to me the best big monster fight I’ve ever seen, my jaw was on the floor in theaters for the first time. The CGI on Kong is still better than even Skull Island, and the bug scene is creepy AF.
Once we get back to NYC, even with Kong it drops back to a B movie because the human characters are just lacking for some reason. I still blame it on miscasting except for Naomi. Although it does have some great moments (1930s NYC CGI is again on point, and I love the soundtrack with the piano with Kong and Naomi) you’re falling asleep by then.
The CGI on Kong will last a lifetime, it’s that good. But the humans and the length drag down an otherwise awesome movie in my opinion. I’ll toss it on though for the island scenes any day of the week.
Sidenote: my mom dropped me and my buddy off at an 11 pm showing and was fricking pissed once she learned she had to pick us up at like 3 am lmao
This post was edited on 6/29/20 at 1:17 am
15
Posted on 6/29/20 at 2:17 am to Frac the world
Jackson's most beautifully shot film by a mile, but it ultimately misses the mark.
Way, way too long (like you said basically 2 or 3 dif. movies in one), way too much time spent on skull island, and no matter what, it's still way too much cgi for my taste.
King Kong worked in 1933 because it was a spectacle of amazing special effects for its day and the NY skyline was still basically brand new.
I think King Kong is more of a novelty than a great idea for a movie.
Way, way too long (like you said basically 2 or 3 dif. movies in one), way too much time spent on skull island, and no matter what, it's still way too much cgi for my taste.
King Kong worked in 1933 because it was a spectacle of amazing special effects for its day and the NY skyline was still basically brand new.
I think King Kong is more of a novelty than a great idea for a movie.
Posted on 6/29/20 at 2:20 am to Frac the world
I feel bad for simply posting the following response after your thoughtful analysis but this sums up best how I feel about the movie...
Meh
Meh
Posted on 6/29/20 at 2:21 am to Frac the world
Please understand I hold you in the highest regard.
Posted on 6/29/20 at 3:17 am to Frac the world
I think your analysis is pretty spot on and I have nothing else to add.
Posted on 6/29/20 at 7:14 am to Frac the world
Overall I enjoyed it, but is not a great movie. It’s a good movie. Like a solid B, but not an A-.
To me, the thing Kong suffers from most is what the Hobbit movies suffer from most. Prolonged, exhausting action sequences that rely heavily on CGI and are too acrobatic for anyone or anything to survive. See the dinosaur stampede for specifics. Good Lord, would that scene end already...
I’m not worried too much about casting because in King Kong, only two characters matter: Kong and the girl. And both nail it. Naomi Watts captivates. Kong is dead on.
Trying to make other characters matter actually hurts the movie. No one cares if they live or die. In fact, we would probably just like to see them die. It’s a monster movie. That’s the problem with any Kong movie, though. I’m sure Jackson was aware of that, but his solution was more length and screen time for those characters, when it probably should have been the opposite approach. Movie is really long.
To me, the thing Kong suffers from most is what the Hobbit movies suffer from most. Prolonged, exhausting action sequences that rely heavily on CGI and are too acrobatic for anyone or anything to survive. See the dinosaur stampede for specifics. Good Lord, would that scene end already...
I’m not worried too much about casting because in King Kong, only two characters matter: Kong and the girl. And both nail it. Naomi Watts captivates. Kong is dead on.
Trying to make other characters matter actually hurts the movie. No one cares if they live or die. In fact, we would probably just like to see them die. It’s a monster movie. That’s the problem with any Kong movie, though. I’m sure Jackson was aware of that, but his solution was more length and screen time for those characters, when it probably should have been the opposite approach. Movie is really long.
Posted on 6/29/20 at 7:35 am to Frac the world
I remember loving it when it came out as a ten year old. The video game was terrifying trying to find bone sticks to fight off velociraptors and waiting for what felt like 2/3 of the game to be completed before you finally got to play as kong 
Posted on 6/29/20 at 7:47 am to Frac the world
Long and boring. Just give me the '76 version with smoking hot Jessica Lange.
Posted on 6/29/20 at 8:10 am to Frac the world
Agree with everyone else, just way too long.
I believe it’s an hour until we see Kong- that number should have been trimmed to 30 min max.
On skull island, they could have done without a few scenes. In fact, the entire skull island sequence felt like a Jurassic park sequel. I could have done without the stampede and bug scene.
New York part was fine- I liked the Central Park skating scene.
Good soundtrack, good movie overall, could have been great. Better effort than the Godzilla movies.
I believe it’s an hour until we see Kong- that number should have been trimmed to 30 min max.
On skull island, they could have done without a few scenes. In fact, the entire skull island sequence felt like a Jurassic park sequel. I could have done without the stampede and bug scene.
New York part was fine- I liked the Central Park skating scene.
Good soundtrack, good movie overall, could have been great. Better effort than the Godzilla movies.
This post was edited on 6/29/20 at 8:29 am
Posted on 6/29/20 at 8:14 am to Frac the world
A vanity project for the guy who was probably the most powerful director in the world at that time. Good popcorn flick, and no single part is really bad in a vacuum, but on its whole it's just way too long. Not like "oh just tighten up each shot so we save 15 minutes" either. I mean a solid 60 minutes could've been axed with no problems. The post above is right that it could have easily been two separate movies. I doubt anyone had the balls to tell that to Jackson at the time though.
I'll take the original and the reboot over '05. I might take '76 over it too.
I'll take the original and the reboot over '05. I might take '76 over it too.
Posted on 6/29/20 at 10:15 am to Frac the world
It's too long but still an enjoyable movie. I always thought that it pushed the PG-13 rating to the max. There are some very intense scenes with the natives and giant bugs.
Posted on 6/29/20 at 10:23 am to Frac the world
How anyone can see the CGI in this film and not be offended is beyond my comprehension.
The scene where they are caught in a dino stampede is fricking atrocious. I don't mean that it doesn't hold up in retrospect. I mean that from day one it was lazy, cheap, unfinished crap that had no business in a major release.
I'll watch Willis O'Brien's original Kong a thousand times before I'll watch Jackson's half-arse attempt at a film. Hell, the '76 version had more heart and showed more love for the original.
The scene where they are caught in a dino stampede is fricking atrocious. I don't mean that it doesn't hold up in retrospect. I mean that from day one it was lazy, cheap, unfinished crap that had no business in a major release.
I'll watch Willis O'Brien's original Kong a thousand times before I'll watch Jackson's half-arse attempt at a film. Hell, the '76 version had more heart and showed more love for the original.
Posted on 6/29/20 at 10:34 am to Fewer Kilometers
quote:
The scene where they are caught in a dino stampede is fricking atrocious. I don't mean that it doesn't hold up in retrospect. I mean that from day one it was lazy, cheap, unfinished crap that had no business in a major release.
That was seriously one of the worst scenes in a major release I've ever seen. Everything about it was awful. The compositing was awful, the direction of the actors was bad, the CG looked unfinished, and ultimately it was completely pointless.
Kong is an example of a movie where somebody from the studio needed to sit the director down and tell them a minimum of 30 minutes worth of script needs to be cut before filming begins. I can't even begin to imagine how bloated the initial script must have been with how long everything goes on in the actual movie.
This post was edited on 6/29/20 at 10:40 am
Posted on 6/29/20 at 10:51 am to Dr RC
Just dropped in to say that King King 05 has over 33 MILLION audience reviews of RT??? 
I searched over a dozen of the most popular movies I could think of and the original Avengers, Dark Knight, Phantom Menace, and the LOTR trilogy were the only ones that had over a million, and all of them were under 2 million except for Return of the King which had over 34 million
Not sure what it is about Jackson but he definitely brings out the inner movie critics in his viewers
I searched over a dozen of the most popular movies I could think of and the original Avengers, Dark Knight, Phantom Menace, and the LOTR trilogy were the only ones that had over a million, and all of them were under 2 million except for Return of the King which had over 34 million
Not sure what it is about Jackson but he definitely brings out the inner movie critics in his viewers
Posted on 6/29/20 at 11:04 am to Frac the world
Too long. Too much CGI.
I don't hate it. I think MEH is the right word.
Hell, it is easily a better movie than 76 but if I had to sit down and watch one right now, it would be 76. Hot Jessica Lange and a solid score. 2005 is a better movie but I was bored with it. Only saw it once and don't plan to ever watch it again.
I don't hate it. I think MEH is the right word.
Hell, it is easily a better movie than 76 but if I had to sit down and watch one right now, it would be 76. Hot Jessica Lange and a solid score. 2005 is a better movie but I was bored with it. Only saw it once and don't plan to ever watch it again.
Posted on 6/29/20 at 11:10 am to Tiger Voodoo
This actually brings back some memories from the early 00's when ROTK came out and briefly took the #1 spot on IMDB's Top 250 list. For MONTHS there were heavy voting brigades and all-out bitchfests on the forums (back when IMDB still had them) about it, mostly from Godfather and Shawshank fanboys (since those two had traded the top two spots for the majority of the site's existence). For a while those three movies had both the most 10-ratings and the most 1-ratings among the site's voters (and probably still do). Peak nerd culture. Good times.
Posted on 6/29/20 at 11:27 am to Fewer Kilometers
The dino stampede CGI was The Rock/Mummy Returns abominable. The human's movement vs spiders CGI looked off. Black & Brody were miscast.
Everything about Kong (& Naomi) was outstanding. I teared up when Kong died. He was that real. Kong vs T-Rex was the best monster clash ever filmed.
Everything about Kong (& Naomi) was outstanding. I teared up when Kong died. He was that real. Kong vs T-Rex was the best monster clash ever filmed.
Posted on 6/29/20 at 11:54 am to Frac the world
Love it, it’s too long and Jack Black was a total miscast in Carl.
Like someone said though at the end of the day the movie is the Story of Kong & Ann. And both Naomi Watts and Andy Serkis knocked it put of the park. Changing it from Kong being sexually attracted to the white woman to a friendship akin to a zoo ape and their trainer. Watts kills it, compared to Lange who was terrible in 76 Kong.
Like someone said though at the end of the day the movie is the Story of Kong & Ann. And both Naomi Watts and Andy Serkis knocked it put of the park. Changing it from Kong being sexually attracted to the white woman to a friendship akin to a zoo ape and their trainer. Watts kills it, compared to Lange who was terrible in 76 Kong.
Posted on 6/29/20 at 11:57 am to pevetohead
quote:
Watts kills it, compared to Lange who was terrible in 76 Kong.
Posted on 6/29/20 at 12:14 pm to Philzilla2k
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News