King Kong: Remade in 1930's Style - A Must See

  • Thread starter Thread starter zoobyshoe
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The new "King Kong" film, set in the 1930s, is receiving positive reviews for its unique approach, distinguishing it from previous remakes. The film's portrayal of Kong, enhanced by advanced effects, captures a nuanced relationship with his leading lady, played by Naomi Watts, creating a fresh narrative. Director Peter Jackson successfully evokes the era's atmosphere, making it a compelling period piece. While some viewers found the film lengthy and criticized certain performances, the visual effects and creature designs were widely praised. Overall, the film is recommended for its impressive cinematic experience and emotional depth.
zoobyshoe
Messages
6,506
Reaction score
1,268
The trailer for the new version of "King Kong" look very good, and it seems to be getting very favorable reviews:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/chi-051212kingkongreview,1,4920167.story?coll=chi-entertainmentfront-hed&ctrack=1&cset=true

The result is a proud, tough loner who moves like lightning. The original Kong, the one who saved RKO from financial ruin back in 1933, can never be topped: Working with an 18-inch miniature, effects wizard Willis O'Brien fashioned a remarkable stop-motion icon. But the new Kong is just different enough to be terrific screen company. His relationship with his leading lady, played with heart and panache by Naomi Watts, doesn't feel like an old story retold. It feels like a brand new story.

Success factor two is the tale of two magical islands, Manhattan and Skull. The movie's technologically complex evocations of 1933 New York are as thrilling as anything in Kong's zip ZIP code. Director Jackson, who co-wrote the screenplay with Fran Walsh and Philippa Boyens, has shrewdly kept "King Kong" part and parcel of 1933, the worst year of the Depression. He has made a swell period picture.

One thing that really struck me is that, rather than update it to today, they have remade it still set in the 1930's like the original. That's pretty unusual for a remake, and suggests it's much more worth seeing than the last, awful, remake.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
zoobyshoe said:
The trailer for the new version of "King Kong" look very good, and it seems to be getting very favorable reviews:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/chi-051212kingkongreview,1,4920167.story?coll=chi-entertainmentfront-hed&ctrack=1&cset=true



One thing that really struck me is that, rather than update it to today, they have remade it still set in the 1930's like the original. That's pretty unusual for a remake, and suggests it's much more worth seeing than the last, awful, remake.

The 30's is so much cooler than today.

Everything today is so lame, and always about standing out, which is stupid.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I never even bothered looking at the last one, but this just might be worth it.
 
JasonRox said:
The 30's is so much cooler than today.
You're dreamin' bud. It was the great depression.
 
zoobyshoe said:
You're dreamin' bud. It was the great depression.

That has nothing to do with the style.

Oh yeah I forgot, if you don't have money, you don't have style. :rolleyes:
 
i saw the previews for the game before i ever saw previews for the movie. i still don't ever see the movie previews often. the game looked neat?
 
Hmmm. There was just an add on the History Channel for and upcoming show they're doing on Gigantopithecus. They're calling it: Giganto: The Real King Kong.
 
It looks like it's going to be great. I'm going to go see it as soon as possible. Probably on Thursday.
It was part of my list of movies I needed to see.
Goblet of Fire
ÆON FLUX
The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe
KONG
I think that's all the ones I really wanted to see.
 
Last edited:
Just saw the movie. I recommend it very much. Really great cinema.
 
  • #10
I saw it the other day myself. It was definitely very good. It did drag a bit though, being a three hour movie. The woman practically falling in love with the ape was rather cheesy too.
Women don't fall in love with apes, I should know.

Other than that though the movie was pretty damn good.
 
  • #11
ÆON FLUX was pretty good. Much better than the TV show

Now I want to go see King Kong
 
  • #12
I saw the movie, and i don t really get it. Is the women in love with the monkey? If so, then she is unfaithful.
 
  • #13
yomamma said:
ÆON FLUX was pretty good. Much better than the TV show
BLASPHEMER! The very thing that made ÆON FLUX so great was the surrealism in environment, technology, characters, and plot. The movie made most of these things far too conventional and pretty much turned it into just another overrated scifi flick. It was almost like they meshed together a few outterlimits scripts then gave the special effects guy a couple tabs of acid.
 
  • #14
kant said:
I saw the movie, and i don t really get it. Is the women in love with the monkey? If so, then she is unfaithful.
I think the idea was supposed to be that she grew a great affection for it. I would have to say that this was overdone and made to seem almost as if she were romanitcally in love.
 
  • #15
TheStatutoryApe said:
I think the idea was supposed to be that she grew a great affection for it. I would have to say that this was overdone and made to seem almost as if she were romanitcally in love.

Hmm... I think the woman is romanically in love with the monkey, and that is she is so hesitant in going with the 'male' character when he tried to resures her from kong. There is simply no signs in the movie that suggest she is not in love with the monkey. All signs seem to show she has a great 'affection' for the monkey. The way i see it, she is being unfaithful, but i am not sure if i interpreted right.
 
  • #16
kant said:
Hmm... I think the woman is romanically in love with the monkey, and that is she is so hesitant in going with the 'male' character when he tried to resures her from kong. There is simply no signs in the movie that suggest she is not in love with the monkey. All signs seem to show she has a great 'affection' for the monkey. The way i see it, she is being unfaithful, but i am not sure if i interpreted right.
Refering to King Kong as a "monkey" is like referring to Godzilla as a "salamander".
 
  • #17
zoobyshoe said:
Refering to King Kong as a "monkey" is like referring to Godzilla as a "salamander".

Well, i am sorry(?) this bother you. I can t do anything about it.
 
  • #18
I saw King Kong and it was very good. They really did a great job with Kong or King. He's as human even more human in some scenes than the other characters. With a few simple, yet elegant facial expressions they did a great job in making you feel for the character.
 
  • #19
kant said:
Well, i am sorry(?) this bother you. I can t do anything about it.
Get(?) a vocabulary.
 
  • #20
kant said:
Well, i am sorry(?) this bother you. I can t do anything about it.
Kong was an ape. Alot of people don't know it but there is a difference between "monkeys" and "apes".
 
  • #21
yeah, apes will eventually take over the planet, monkeys won't
 
  • #22
zoobyshoe said:
Get(?) a vocabulary.

I perfer monkey.
 
  • #23
kant said:
I perfer monkey.
You kant understand.
 
  • #24
I found Kong to be huge, and rather dumb.
 
  • #25
arildno said:
I found Kong to be... ...rather dumb.
Which is disappointing to hear, since we know the historical Kong held at least two PhD's.
 
  • #26
Did anyone feel that the first hour dragged a bit? The last two were awesome.
 
  • #27
recon said:
Did anyone feel that the first hour dragged a bit? The last two were awesome.
Eeh??
The first part, up and including the meeting the creepy natives was the best.
After that, the movie become boring with overdone special effects (with the cockroaches attack as the nadir).
 
  • #28
Ah, I went into the theatre expecting the movie to be packed with action. I enjoyed the T-Rex fight, although the stampede was a little boring. I actually thought the bug scene was good, but went on for too long.

I didn't expect excellent drama coming from Peter Jackson. Had I expected that, I would be very disappointed. There were too many cheesy moments, and I think we could have done without the ice sliding scene.

It's also too bad that they conveniently left out the 'scene' where Kong is transported to New York. ;)
 
  • #29
I finally saw it tonight.

I thought the FX were tremendous, and all the creatures were very cool. They made Kong a very tough and realistic Gorilla in the sense of being completely wild. The look on his face never got human, and you don't sense he ever fell in love with the girl romantically. He was just intrigued that she was a creature who seemed to appreciate him, who tried to interact with him . The fact she tried to entertain him is really what turned her from a toy into a companion/pet. They hinted at the fact he must be incredibly lonely for companionship by showing the skeletons of all the other giant gorillas: he seemed to be the only one left.

I don't think the girl was "in love" with him either, except the way a girl might love a wild horse she's tamed. I think she just felt special and kind of powerful because she was the one who got to his friendlier side and who elicited the kind of loyalty which caused him to fight off three T-Rex's who were trying to eat her. Still, they could probably have found an actress who conveyed that better than this one did. She was a bit one dimensional.

The casting was bad. It could have been a super-blockbuster if they had only had a core group of about three really interesting actors. Let's say Bruce Willis as the boat captain, Jeff Goldblum as the playright, and Leonardo DiCaprio as the movie director. Not those three in particular, but three actors of that calibre. I got sick of Jack Black after an hour of him, and you can't get sick of the main character without the film suffering alot

The whole island, right from the second you first see it, was successfully nighmarish. The insane tribe was truly disturbing, and their architecture was inherently creepy. All the dinosaurs seemed to be deformed with teeth out of place and such, suggesting this depleted gene pool that was down to producing only mutants.

The stampede and dinosaur fights were all really tremendous. There were all kinds of little extra touches they put in that demonstrated extreme planning and care. They all go by pretty fast, though, so I suppose there's more detail to notice when the DVD comes out and you can watch it at your own pace. I would reccomend people see it in the theater, though, because it's a real sensory treat being all huge on the screen.

It was probably too long, and cheesy in places, but definitely worth seeing.
 
  • #30
I saw King Kong the other day with a few buds. I didn't like it very much. I thought a lot of the things that were supposed to be "real" looked too unrealistic

****SPOILERS****
- for example how like 20 people run with stampeding dinosaurs and maybe one of them actually dies or even gets injured. I didn't like jack black at all in this movie. He isn't right for the serious role, and his personality will annoy the hell out of you (his movie personality).

-Skull island as a whole kicked major arse. The way the rocks looked liek skulls - and especially the island tribe...were incredible. I loved how that one kidnap artist used a giant stick to jump to the boat.
 
Last edited:
  • #31
KingNothing said:
- for example how like 20 people run with stampeding dinosaurs and maybe one of them actually dies or even gets injured.
Yeah, you're right. The stampede started off really cool with the dinosaurs crashing into the walls and each other, but then they made the whole situation way, way too complex, and it did get outside any possible realistic situation there. I thought they returned to plausibility and added a great twist, though, when they all came out on the narrow ledge, and many of them couldn't make the turn.
I didn't like jack black at all in this movie. He isn't right for the serious role, and his personality will annoy the hell out of you (his movie personality).
I thought he was going to work out at first cause it didn't seem like a serious role: he was playing the embodyment of a stereotype. That was good in the scene with the producers at the beginning, and all up to about when the ship left. Then he did start to get repetitive with the same stare every time he saw something amazing. His character didn't develop, didn't seem to properly get changed by all the incidents. I ended up having no interest in the character.
-Skull island as a whole kicked major arse. The way the rocks looked liek skulls - and especially the island tribe...were incredible. I loved how that one kidnap artist used a giant stick to jump to the boat.
Yeah, the pole vaulting guy was a clever touch. I enjoyed that too.
 
  • #32
TheStatutoryApe said:
It looks like it's going to be great. I'm going to go see it as soon as possible. Probably on Thursday.
It was part of my list of movies I needed to see.
Goblet of Fire
ÆON FLUX
The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe
KONG
I think that's all the ones I really wanted to see.
The goblet of fire: best book of the series, worst movie of the series there was just too much going on and it was confusing. They couldn't put everything from the book into the movie and left out too much. The other movies followed the books perfectly this one was just a confusing mess.
Aeon Flux: Didn't do much for me. I didn't really like it.
the lion, the witch and the wardrobe: I liked this one quite a bit, which suprised me, but would have liked it more if I didn't already know exactly how everything turns out. I wasn't that big of a fan of the book in the first place.
King Kong: I've only seen the first half and the natives scared the hell out of me.
 
  • #33
recon said:
Ah, I went into the theatre expecting the movie to be packed with action. I enjoyed the T-Rex fight, although the stampede was a little boring. I actually thought the bug scene was good, but went on for too long.

I didn't expect excellent drama coming from Peter Jackson. Had I expected that, I would be very disappointed. There were too many cheesy moments, and I think we could have done without the ice sliding scene.

It's also too bad that they conveniently left out the 'scene' where Kong is transported to New York. ;)
Actually, what I thought worked best in the movie was all the little moments with humour (like when Kong checks if the T-Rex is really dead, or just momentarily slack-jawed..).

The creepiest character was without doubt the old hag (the "Tore Kong"-witch).
She was scary.
 
  • #34
tribdog said:
The goblet of fire: best book of the series, worst movie of the series there was just too much going on and it was confusing. They couldn't put everything from the book into the movie and left out too much. The other movies followed the books perfectly this one was just a confusing mess.
Aeon Flux: Didn't do much for me. I didn't really like it.
the lion, the witch and the wardrobe: I liked this one quite a bit, which suprised me, but would have liked it more if I didn't already know exactly how everything turns out. I wasn't that big of a fan of the book in the first place.
King Kong: I've only seen the first half and the natives scared the hell out of me.
I thought the same thing about the Goblet of Fire movie. They tried so hard to cram as much as possible into the movie and it wound up making the whole thing feel rushed with things still being left out.

I already gave a bit of a critique on ÆON FLUX. I think it started pretty well but they lost me after about the first half.

Narnia was good though I had the feeling that they were trying very much to make it similar to the LotR movies.

I think that the Natives were probably the best part of the movie, in my opinion.

Zoob said:
The look on his face never got human, and you don't sense he ever fell in love with the girl romantically.
Unless I'm mistaken a lot of the way he reacted to her and the things he did for her reminded me of the way I've heard gorillas act towards potential mates. Then ofcourse there was the scene where he did exactly what the actor had explained was the way a man is supposed to treat a girl if he wants to get her. And that ice scene that recon mentioned was just terribly cheesy.
 
  • #35
King Kong was great. Despite the fact none of the physics add up, and they don't show you how in the hell they get Kong on that tiny little boat!
 
  • #36
TheStatutoryApe said:
Unless I'm mistaken a lot of the way he reacted to her and the things he did for her reminded me of the way I've heard gorillas act towards potential mates. Then of course there was the scene where he did exactly what the actor had explained was the way a man is supposed to treat a girl if he wants to get her. And that ice scene that recon mentioned was just terribly cheesy.
I'm not up on Gorilla mating behavior. At first he just seemed like a typical silverback establishing who's boss and later I was reminded of Koko and her pet kitten All Ball. Koko loved All Ball and went into a deep depression when the kitten died.

I thought the ice scene was pretty good. Here in San Diego they put unusual things is the animals' enclosures occasionally to break up their routine and give them something to play with. It always causes unusual reactions from the animals when they find, say, a Halloween pumpkin in their territory. I thought the way Kong reacted to the ice was probably very much what a real gorilla might do.
 
  • #37
Entropy said:
King Kong was great. Despite the fact none of the physics add up, and they don't show you how in the hell they get Kong on that tiny little boat!
I think in the real world he would have broken her neck within a minute after he first picked her up, he was swinging her around so wildly.

Yeah, they glossed over some serious engineering problems by neglecting to show how they even moved him an inch from where he went down.
 
  • #38
zoobyshoe said:
Yeah, they glossed over some serious engineering problems by neglecting to show how they even moved him an inch from where he went down.
Theoretically they could have just left him in the water and towed him to make use of his buoyancy. That brings up all kinds of issues regarding how likely he would have survived the haul. The reality would more likely have been that he died and they just displayed the body.
 
  • #39
By the way since we started talking about this it reminded me of the "what song reminds you of who" thread and the song I picked for you..."Science Fiction(Double Feature)".
"Then something went wrong for Fay Wray and King Kong
They got caught in a celluloid jam"
 
  • #40
TheStatutoryApe said:
By the way since we started talking about this it reminded me of the "what song reminds you of who" thread and the song I picked for you..."Science Fiction(Double Feature)".
"Then something went wrong for Fay Wray and King Kong
They got caught in a celluloid jam"
I didn't read too much of that thread. I know Rocky Horror well because I worked at a theater that showed it every Fri & Sat at midnight. Had that job for 2 1/2 years. If you stayed up late to work Rocky you got an extra five bucks "combat" pay, so I always did.

Without knowing that history, though, it's not clear to me why that song would remind you of me.
 
  • #41
Zoob said:
Without knowing that history, though, it's not clear to me why that song would remind you of me.
It was your interest in things like Bigfoot and SciFi really, nothing deep since I don't really know you well at all. You had started a thread around that time asking people of what other sorts of monsters could be introduced into scifi since so many had been covered and you seemed relatively well versed on the movies. That song, due to the lyrics, was the first thing that came to mind because of that.
 
  • #42
TheStatutoryApe said:
It was your interest in things like Bigfoot and SciFi really, nothing deep since I don't really know you well at all. You had started a thread around that time asking people of what other sorts of monsters could be introduced into scifi since so many had been covered and you seemed relatively well versed on the movies. That song, due to the lyrics, was the first thing that came to mind because of that.
Oh, I see. I'm not a Sci-Fi fan at all, per se, it's just that there's usually one or another film around in that genre that is particularly entertaining, particularly well done in some way. It's always nice when someone manages to do something that strikes you as fresh and clever among a mass of imaginationless, derivative pot boilers. Sci-Fi is full of those, so I notice when someone can do something with some thought behind it and a new and interesting twist. I started that particular thread out of boredom wondering if I could spark some creativity in anyone's thinking. It wasn't really from any special affection for sci-fi. It was more like: "Someone please say something creative and entertain me."
 
  • #43
Which is why we're really all here, deep down inside. To entertain you, sir!
 

Similar threads

News Mayor C. Ray Nagin apologized Tuesday
Replies
7
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top