The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Finally got around to watchign King Kong, after my continuing cinema apathy stopped me watching it on it's release, and whilst some of the set pieces may have looked even better on the big screen, I'm glad I didn't waste my money, as there was a lot I didn't like about it, including:
1: The dinosaur stampede, and subsequent crush
This bit looked awful, there were too many dinosaurs, and it failed to convince. Other elements of the film that combined CG with human characters, such as Ann Darrow with the T-Rex looked convincing, as they were never too close – the running dinosaurs around all of the human characters just didn’t work. It only got worse when they all started tumbling over each other. The scene added nothing good to the movie, just more ‘mild preil’ and after seeing the best they could do with it, they really should have cut it.
2: Ann Darrow’s Vaudeville act.
Acting the fool to impress King Kong. It was stupid. And I swear she wasn’t really juggling, they added the balls in afterwards. But the way she initially threw herself to the floor was a moment that made me go, ‘what...?’ and the subsequent tomfoolery left me shaking my head.
3: Shaking the tree
So there’s a bunch of people on a fallen tree, and Kong’s shaking it, twisting it around, and they nearly all manage to hold on. Without changing their grip. Even when it’s tumbling into the crevice. Now I can go along with the fantastical and the amazing, I’m more than willing to be lead by the unbelievable, but that was defying the laws of physics, and that’s just not on.
4: swinging dinosaurs
A T=Rex trapped in vines has the capability to swing itself to try to catch prey? Nope, no way. It would be thrashing about, trying to free itself in absolute panic, given the way they have acted in the fight before hand (which I thought was pretty stunning, by the way).
5: Insects & bats
All of the stuff that took away from Kong and the dinosaurs. It was overkill, you didn’t need the scene with all of the insects. It was yet more unnecessary ‘mild peril’.
6: riding off on a bat
Sticking with the bats, how come they attacked Kong all of a sudden? That didn’t make sense. And how come they were incapable of getting near Jack and Ann as they climbed down the vine? They riding off on one’s foot was just a step too far.
I’m not saying it was a poor movie, it certainly had it’s moments, but all in all I was left disappointed. The pacing was off, with too much attention paid to putting characters in perilous situations, whether they were needed or not, Rather than adding to the atmosphere of the island, it was a clunky hop from set-piece to set-piece. The fight with the insects immediately after Kong’s battle with the T-Rex was entirely pointless, and took away all that was good about the previous scenes.
Can’t really fault any of the performances either, Jack Black was more convincing that I thought he could be, and I didn’t have Adrien Brody down as a ‘hero’ (which is why I think he was cast) but that worked too.
Again, it could have been so much better, less is more in some cases, but after the success of Lord of the Rings who’s going to tell Peter Jackson that he’s wrong?
1: The dinosaur stampede, and subsequent crush
This bit looked awful, there were too many dinosaurs, and it failed to convince. Other elements of the film that combined CG with human characters, such as Ann Darrow with the T-Rex looked convincing, as they were never too close – the running dinosaurs around all of the human characters just didn’t work. It only got worse when they all started tumbling over each other. The scene added nothing good to the movie, just more ‘mild preil’ and after seeing the best they could do with it, they really should have cut it.
2: Ann Darrow’s Vaudeville act.
Acting the fool to impress King Kong. It was stupid. And I swear she wasn’t really juggling, they added the balls in afterwards. But the way she initially threw herself to the floor was a moment that made me go, ‘what...?’ and the subsequent tomfoolery left me shaking my head.
3: Shaking the tree
So there’s a bunch of people on a fallen tree, and Kong’s shaking it, twisting it around, and they nearly all manage to hold on. Without changing their grip. Even when it’s tumbling into the crevice. Now I can go along with the fantastical and the amazing, I’m more than willing to be lead by the unbelievable, but that was defying the laws of physics, and that’s just not on.
4: swinging dinosaurs
A T=Rex trapped in vines has the capability to swing itself to try to catch prey? Nope, no way. It would be thrashing about, trying to free itself in absolute panic, given the way they have acted in the fight before hand (which I thought was pretty stunning, by the way).
5: Insects & bats
All of the stuff that took away from Kong and the dinosaurs. It was overkill, you didn’t need the scene with all of the insects. It was yet more unnecessary ‘mild peril’.
6: riding off on a bat
Sticking with the bats, how come they attacked Kong all of a sudden? That didn’t make sense. And how come they were incapable of getting near Jack and Ann as they climbed down the vine? They riding off on one’s foot was just a step too far.
I’m not saying it was a poor movie, it certainly had it’s moments, but all in all I was left disappointed. The pacing was off, with too much attention paid to putting characters in perilous situations, whether they were needed or not, Rather than adding to the atmosphere of the island, it was a clunky hop from set-piece to set-piece. The fight with the insects immediately after Kong’s battle with the T-Rex was entirely pointless, and took away all that was good about the previous scenes.
Can’t really fault any of the performances either, Jack Black was more convincing that I thought he could be, and I didn’t have Adrien Brody down as a ‘hero’ (which is why I think he was cast) but that worked too.
Again, it could have been so much better, less is more in some cases, but after the success of Lord of the Rings who’s going to tell Peter Jackson that he’s wrong?
Being fair though, those things are really nitpicking. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that some of the bits were indeed strange and unbelievable, like the flight on the bat's foot, but these really aren't enough to dampen my outlook on the film.
Take for example the scene with the stampeding dinosaurs, it may not have added all that much or been particularly helpful to the story, yet almost all films have bits like this. Although it was mild peril it was at least trying to introduce the viewer to the fact that there were dinosaurs on the island, and the loss of the camera stand is significant as it does start to mark the change from filming to capturing. If the scene was just introducing the dinosaurs it would have been great, but it was an oversight to try and turn it into a Jurassic Park style chase. The CGI wasn't that bad, though I agree that the falling dinosaurs were tacky. Jackson was just trying to introduce a little fast paced chase scene into the action which had been a little stationary in the scene before.
The success of the Kong films has always been that its all about raw action, which is what the insects and dinosaurs were introduced for; to try and let the film move from action to action, perhaps because they couldn't think of anything else. The casting, locations and the way the story of Kong did develop the characters and sophisticated the scenes improved upon the awful 70s version dramatically and also the landmark 30s debut, in a way that a few niggles didn't affect.
The Ann Darrow juggling scene was quite pointless, but they had decided they needed to introduce some action, which they thoughtlessly executed in a way that plumped for Disney-esque she's on the floor hur hur type humour. Once again it was a story advancer. The idea was to show the relationship between Ann and Kong developing. He respected her a little and it showed that she wasn't simply going to be killed like those before her.
Likewise the swinging T-Rex sequence. If they had of just not included the scene it may have been better, but as they felt it was needed to lead into the next scene Jackson had to make it interesting somehow. A T-Rex flailing around wouldn't have been too exciting.
As for the grip-changing on the log, it was simply too small a view on the humans to show them moving their grips around as they fell. Even if they had of, it wouldn't have been appreciated. No, for me the idiocy in that scene was that he opened fire with a machine gun into Kong's cave. Being fair the men couldn't keep their grips long, and lost them when the log got caught.
I know what you're saying in terms of careless niggles but at the same time there is a point to them and other audiences will appreciate an action sequence of characters running away from dinosaurs or Ann clambering over T-Rex's mouths much more than they would a stationary scene, which would have led people to ask what the point in it was. No, Kong's problem lies in always trying to blend scenes using action sequences.
The Holly-jolly Jackson didn't do too badly, certainly not enough to be criticised for as he turned out a good and well-rounded film. Forgive him some CGI blips too, after all he rendered the tribal men and women realistically.
Take for example the scene with the stampeding dinosaurs, it may not have added all that much or been particularly helpful to the story, yet almost all films have bits like this. Although it was mild peril it was at least trying to introduce the viewer to the fact that there were dinosaurs on the island, and the loss of the camera stand is significant as it does start to mark the change from filming to capturing. If the scene was just introducing the dinosaurs it would have been great, but it was an oversight to try and turn it into a Jurassic Park style chase. The CGI wasn't that bad, though I agree that the falling dinosaurs were tacky. Jackson was just trying to introduce a little fast paced chase scene into the action which had been a little stationary in the scene before.
The success of the Kong films has always been that its all about raw action, which is what the insects and dinosaurs were introduced for; to try and let the film move from action to action, perhaps because they couldn't think of anything else. The casting, locations and the way the story of Kong did develop the characters and sophisticated the scenes improved upon the awful 70s version dramatically and also the landmark 30s debut, in a way that a few niggles didn't affect.
The Ann Darrow juggling scene was quite pointless, but they had decided they needed to introduce some action, which they thoughtlessly executed in a way that plumped for Disney-esque she's on the floor hur hur type humour. Once again it was a story advancer. The idea was to show the relationship between Ann and Kong developing. He respected her a little and it showed that she wasn't simply going to be killed like those before her.
Likewise the swinging T-Rex sequence. If they had of just not included the scene it may have been better, but as they felt it was needed to lead into the next scene Jackson had to make it interesting somehow. A T-Rex flailing around wouldn't have been too exciting.
As for the grip-changing on the log, it was simply too small a view on the humans to show them moving their grips around as they fell. Even if they had of, it wouldn't have been appreciated. No, for me the idiocy in that scene was that he opened fire with a machine gun into Kong's cave. Being fair the men couldn't keep their grips long, and lost them when the log got caught.
I know what you're saying in terms of careless niggles but at the same time there is a point to them and other audiences will appreciate an action sequence of characters running away from dinosaurs or Ann clambering over T-Rex's mouths much more than they would a stationary scene, which would have led people to ask what the point in it was. No, Kong's problem lies in always trying to blend scenes using action sequences.
The Holly-jolly Jackson didn't do too badly, certainly not enough to be criticised for as he turned out a good and well-rounded film. Forgive him some CGI blips too, after all he rendered the tribal men and women realistically.
Finally got around to watchign King Kong, after my continuing cinema apathy stopped me watching it on it's release, and whilst some of the set pieces may have looked even better on the big screen, I'm glad I didn't waste my money, as there was a lot I didn't like about it, including:
1: The dinosaur stampede, and subsequent crush
This bit looked awful, there were too many dinosaurs, and it failed to convince. Other elements of the film that combined CG with human characters, such as Ann Darrow with the T-Rex looked convincing, as they were never too close – the running dinosaurs around all of the human characters just didn’t work. It only got worse when they all started tumbling over each other. The scene added nothing good to the movie, just more ‘mild preil’ and after seeing the best they could do with it, they really should have cut it.
2: Ann Darrow’s Vaudeville act.
Acting the fool to impress King Kong. It was stupid. And I swear she wasn’t really juggling, they added the balls in afterwards. But the way she initially threw herself to the floor was a moment that made me go, ‘what...?’ and the subsequent tomfoolery left me shaking my head.
3: Shaking the tree
So there’s a bunch of people on a fallen tree, and Kong’s shaking it, twisting it around, and they nearly all manage to hold on. Without changing their grip. Even when it’s tumbling into the crevice. Now I can go along with the fantastical and the amazing, I’m more than willing to be lead by the unbelievable, but that was defying the laws of physics, and that’s just not on.
4: swinging dinosaurs
A T=Rex trapped in vines has the capability to swing itself to try to catch prey? Nope, no way. It would be thrashing about, trying to free itself in absolute panic, given the way they have acted in the fight before hand (which I thought was pretty stunning, by the way).
5: Insects & bats
All of the stuff that took away from Kong and the dinosaurs. It was overkill, you didn’t need the scene with all of the insects. It was yet more unnecessary ‘mild peril’.
6: riding off on a bat
Sticking with the bats, how come they attacked Kong all of a sudden? That didn’t make sense. And how come they were incapable of getting near Jack and Ann as they climbed down the vine? They riding off on one’s foot was just a step too far.
I’m not saying it was a poor movie, it certainly had it’s moments, but all in all I was left disappointed. The pacing was off, with too much attention paid to putting characters in perilous situations, whether they were needed or not, Rather than adding to the atmosphere of the island, it was a clunky hop from set-piece to set-piece. The fight with the insects immediately after Kong’s battle with the T-Rex was entirely pointless, and took away all that was good about the previous scenes.
Can’t really fault any of the performances either, Jack Black was more convincing that I thought he could be, and I didn’t have Adrien Brody down as a ‘hero’ (which is why I think he was cast) but that worked too.
Again, it could have been so much better, less is more in some cases, but after the success of Lord of the Rings who’s going to tell Peter Jackson that he’s wrong?
1: The dinosaur stampede, and subsequent crush
This bit looked awful, there were too many dinosaurs, and it failed to convince. Other elements of the film that combined CG with human characters, such as Ann Darrow with the T-Rex looked convincing, as they were never too close – the running dinosaurs around all of the human characters just didn’t work. It only got worse when they all started tumbling over each other. The scene added nothing good to the movie, just more ‘mild preil’ and after seeing the best they could do with it, they really should have cut it.
2: Ann Darrow’s Vaudeville act.
Acting the fool to impress King Kong. It was stupid. And I swear she wasn’t really juggling, they added the balls in afterwards. But the way she initially threw herself to the floor was a moment that made me go, ‘what...?’ and the subsequent tomfoolery left me shaking my head.
3: Shaking the tree
So there’s a bunch of people on a fallen tree, and Kong’s shaking it, twisting it around, and they nearly all manage to hold on. Without changing their grip. Even when it’s tumbling into the crevice. Now I can go along with the fantastical and the amazing, I’m more than willing to be lead by the unbelievable, but that was defying the laws of physics, and that’s just not on.
4: swinging dinosaurs
A T=Rex trapped in vines has the capability to swing itself to try to catch prey? Nope, no way. It would be thrashing about, trying to free itself in absolute panic, given the way they have acted in the fight before hand (which I thought was pretty stunning, by the way).
5: Insects & bats
All of the stuff that took away from Kong and the dinosaurs. It was overkill, you didn’t need the scene with all of the insects. It was yet more unnecessary ‘mild peril’.
6: riding off on a bat
Sticking with the bats, how come they attacked Kong all of a sudden? That didn’t make sense. And how come they were incapable of getting near Jack and Ann as they climbed down the vine? They riding off on one’s foot was just a step too far.
I’m not saying it was a poor movie, it certainly had it’s moments, but all in all I was left disappointed. The pacing was off, with too much attention paid to putting characters in perilous situations, whether they were needed or not, Rather than adding to the atmosphere of the island, it was a clunky hop from set-piece to set-piece. The fight with the insects immediately after Kong’s battle with the T-Rex was entirely pointless, and took away all that was good about the previous scenes.
Can’t really fault any of the performances either, Jack Black was more convincing that I thought he could be, and I didn’t have Adrien Brody down as a ‘hero’ (which is why I think he was cast) but that worked too.
Again, it could have been so much better, less is more in some cases, but after the success of Lord of the Rings who’s going to tell Peter Jackson that he’s wrong?