This movie was too f**cking long, but still good. But no sex.

This is the first time I've bought the single disc edition of a movie thats available in 2 disker form too. I wasnt planning to but I found the single disc for 10 dollars, so I couldn't resist.
Liked the movie a lot even though it has some big flaws. I just watched it on DVD and dont regret a thing
And its obvious an extended edition is coming, I read an interview with PJ saying that thats the reason this edition doesn't have a commentary track, they're saving it for the other.

floyd dylan wrote: One question, did beauty really kill the beast?  Or do you think Jack Black's character really killed Kong?

Don't know about his character, but Black himself almost killed this movie for me. He was terrible. And horribly miscast. And I'm a huge JB fan.  Regarding the film itself, I loved the first and last hour. Hated, HATED, the middle. Those natives were way too over the top. And the dinosaurs and giant insects were too much as well. Not to mention the scenes with the humans running underneath the dinosaurs were pretty poorly done. But the last hour and ending redeemed all the flaws during the middle.

Extended Edition vader78 wrote: I did read somewhere there might be a extended version later on in the year. really? does this movie need to be any longer?


Well with Peter Jackson length does not matter as long as you're enjoying your ride without getting bored (ex: Lord Of The Rings The Return Of The King). However there are no official news about the extended cut yet but the high propability of such an edition is based on the fact that a scene from the theatrical trailer does not appear in the movie (the one with the crew on the bottom of the island where Jack Black tells Naomi Watts to scream for her life and then they hear Kong replying to that scream). and from other experiences, every shot has a place inside the movie, so we may very well see a special extended edition.

this was a great movie. a little long, but I thought it was great. the single disc art is much better then the 2 disc version. I did read somewhere there might be a extended version later on in the year. really? does this movie need to be any longer?

what!? HOW!?

sorry I think this film stars naomi watts in the lead, jack black and adrien brody in the supporting (2nd & 3rd billing).
please do not elevate jack black and his role at the expense of the official lead & character naomi watts/ann darrow.

jgarza007 wrote: What? no DTS Track.....

With the movie clocking in at over three hours long, a DTS track might not have fit without compromising video quality.  

Nevunderwood wrote: Jurgie1979 wrote: P.S. - I'm baffled by how many people can't spell "definitely" -how on Earth does an A get in there?

Yeah, but by far the most popular spelling mistake I've come across is people spelling "Loser" as "Looser"....it never fails - every time I see someone use the word, it's ALWAYS spelled wrong!....a very close #2 would have to be people mixing up "you're" with "your".... but anyway, I suppose this isn't a forum on the proper use of grammar and spelling, just wanted to weigh in....

Not to mention how many people misspell ridiculous.  It's spelled with an i, not an e.  The prefix re- means again, so everytime I see ridiculous spelled rediculous, I'm thinking diculous again?  LOL.

One question, did beauty really kill the beast?  Or do you think Jack Black's character really killed Kong?

There will be an extened cut! It came out of Peter's mouth when he accepted the award for Empire! I have the video that says it to! WITH BLOOPERS! He also said on the new cut it will feature how they get King Kong back to NYC.

http://www.empireonline.com/news/story.asp?NID=...

I liked the movie, but I didn't love it. It ran too long in sections (namely the beginning, middle, and end), and it really tested my patience with its bloated length. I understand he loves the 1933 version and did his own version of it, but had he cut 30-40 minutes out, I would've loved it. I didn't mind the length of the LOTR movies, because they kept me engrossed from beginning to end. (Not to mention the CGI velociraptors and brontosauruses during the stampede looked cheesy when compared to ILM's stupendous work on "Jurassic Park".)

Quibbles aisde, the majority of the movie was very good and worthwhile - definitely a purchase for me. I'm stuck on whether I should just get the single-disc or 2-disc special edition (I do like what goes on during post-production, such as editing and scoring the film). Cover art for both editions look really good.

For those of you complaining about the lack of DTS on either edition -- the movie is 3 hours long, which is why it namely has a disc to itself. Putting a DD-EX 5.1 track and a DTS-ES 6.1 track on the movie would definitely hurt the video quality. (Why do you think New Line didn't put DTS on the 2-disc releases of LOTR?)

Jurgie1979 wrote: P.S. - I'm baffled by how many people can't spell "definitely" -how on Earth does an A get in there?

Yeah, but by far the most popular spelling mistake I've come across is people spelling "Loser" as "Looser"....it never fails - every time I see someone use the word, it's ALWAYS spelled wrong!....a very close #2 would have to be people mixing up "you're" with "your".... but anyway, I suppose this isn't a forum on the proper use of grammar and spelling, just wanted to weigh in....

Saw this yesterday and I think it was way too long. Character development is fine but not when you are going to kill half of them off or they don't even have their character 'arcs' completed. At least half an hour could have gone from the opening and at LEAST a good 45 minutes from the 'Skull Island' segment. The ending was briliiant but by that time I didn't even care anymore. It's not like I didn't know what was gonna happen!

why o retailers release a 1-disk version of a movie for like 28 bucks and then release a 2 disk for 30 bucks? that makes no sense.

Loved the film - but I'm waiting for the extended version. I actually kind of like the artwork. Not as good as the posters but kind of a cool retro feel nonetheless.

P.S. - I'm baffled by how many people can't spell "definitely" -how on Earth does an A get in there?

I like the cover, for both. The black case with the small picture compliments the KING KONG productions Diaries box already out. So if you don't like it, just remember it was probably made to compliment the diaries box.

As for DTS, you can;t put a 3 hour movie AND DTS on the same disc. I'm sure when the 4 disc edition is released and the movie is 2 disc DTS will be available.

I found this in the rumor mill at digitalbits.com:

"Just a day after we posted information about the possibility of an extended edition of The Chronicles of Narnia coming to DVD... we're now hearing that Peter Jackson and Universal may be planning a King Kong: Extended Edition as well. Arnaud Calistri, the editor of the French DVD news site DVDRama, e-mailed me yesterday to say that Universal France has just confirmed that a deluxe King Kong "box set edition" is being prepared for DVD release in November of this year, and that it will feature a new edit of the film itself. France will also be getting the same two editions the studio just announced for release here in the States on 3/28, but not until August. We're working with our own sources to try and confirm this, but it definitely seems like a possibility given Jackson's track record with his Lord of the Rings extended DVDs.

Stay tuned.."

I was going to order the 2-disc SE, but now I'll just put the 1-disc version on my Netflix... I can wait a few months.

Here's to hoping for a deluxe edition.  I didn't love it enough to get both the 2 and "deluxe".  And there better be a deluxe considering the Production diaries have such an swesome.

never got a chance to see this but I really want to!!

one of my least favourite movies of the year, incredibly over rated long and boring. will never watch it again

According to another site a extended edition is coming in November

This movie is defintly worth a pick up. Even if its really long

This remake of "King Kong" is the definitive version. So if you are going to get one of the three (1933, 1976, 2005) get this one. Its a great film and I'm surprised that its taken this long for a DVD release. But March 28th is not that far away so I cannot wait. As for the cover art, its decent. I would have much rather seen the poster for the regular DVD release and the cover they have for the 2-Disc Special Edition. But I'm just glad that its coming!!! But to tell you the truth I expected Universal was going to do a 3-Disc Collector's Edition and then just a regular 2-Disc Special Edition for the general public. As for squeezing a 3hr film onto one disc, Universal will do what they did with "Cinderella Man" and put the film on one side and if they need to continue it onto the flipside, along with some bonus material. I also read over at thedigitalbits.com that the 2-Disc Special Edition will be a continuation of "King Kong: Peter Jackson's Production Diaries", so they will show all the post production stuff on disc 2. Well here are my thoughts and I cant wait to pick this up!

Matt wrote: Mark Buchanan wrote: First hour of this movie could've easily been 10 minutes.
Yeah, who needs things like character development, story structure, or the build of anticipation in their movies these days.

I didn't think the first hour had any of that...just alot of filler.

Danger Mouse wrote: I can't believe they managed to squeeze a 3hr movie into 1 disc.  Thats really , really pushing it.. compression must be high on this disc so I would not be suprised for artifacting in some scenes. :|  
Agreed.

Remember that the Academy Awards are on March 5th and this movie comes out on March 28. You'll definitely see a change in the artwork if it wins any awards.

I'm another one in the 'underwhelmed' camp. Didn't enjoy it anywhere near as much as I hoped I would. Kong looked good, but some of the other CGI was terrible by today's standards. The bit where the natives pole vaulted over to the ship was about as realistic as the CGI swordfight in Blade II. I just found most of it boring.

Great artwork. Wonder why they didn't use this for the U.S. one sheet. I am certain they will let Jackson do a uber-deluxe set a little ways down the road. Too much money to be mined in those home markets not to.

They did the same with aviator, the 1 disc version had the art take up the whole cover, whiole the 2 disc version was boxed.

Cheers

Dave

I thought this film was awesome and perfectly captured the spirit of the original film, but I think I will wait for an SEE ala LOTR.

I thought this movie was ok, but it was too long. Jackson should have cut it down by at least 30 mins and then added all his in depth character stuff for a big 4 disk pack like he did on LOTR. Special effects were amazing and I like the cover art but they should have done something special for the 2 disk set

Jonny "Me You" wrote: I guess I'm the only one that found the movie subpar at best. Mediocre character development, unnecessary supporting roles, poor casting, average music, drab pacing, it goes on and on...even cheap looking special effects from WETA digital and some cheesy directing choices from Peter Jackson. I was terribly disapointed overall. Actually it was probably the biggest disapointment of the year for me.

Buy the original instead.

I thought it was decent, nothing very spectacular, but still enjoyable.  It wasn't really one of my favorites this past year, but it was one of a few movies I got to go see this last winter and I made the most of it.  I did buy the soundtrack and it is a great listen.  As far as buying the movie, I really am not sure if I will right away, or if I will wait and see if an extended edition is announced.  

I very much like that cover art, though, and will settle for the single discer should I decide to throw money down on this release.  I'm not a big fan of special features lest I REALLY liked the movie.  In fact, the only DVD that I have watched ALL the special features on was Batman Begins.  That's some great s**t right there...

Does anyone know if Peter Jackson secured the rights for The Hobbit?  Last I heard, the descendants (sons or grandsons, I don't recall) of Tolkien were being very difficult, but I think negotiations are still taking place...

Well, the reason for no DTS is simple- there isn't enough room on one disc to fit the entire 190 minute movie with a DTS track, so if I had to choice wether to have the film spread onto two discs with a DTS track on just on one disc with a plain old Dolby track, I'll definitly go for the the Dolby one. So maybe when they do an extended cut, than I would expect a DTS track (like they did with the LotR films)

artwork is pretty good, but wish there was more of a difference between the 1 and 2 discs.

THE 2 DISC IS MINE!

I'm buying this no matter what. I think the art is great, but I'm really surprised they didn't use the poster art.

Philip Lombard wrote: I smell revisions on the way.

I hope.

Max M. wrote: I changed my mind... for now, I'll settle for the 1-disker, then in November, i'll get the Super Special Extended Edition.

I'm sure you could afford the extra $1.00!

Love the cover and the movie.

It's about f**king time, they officially announce this...it's coming out in about 7 weeks and they're just now getting around to it?

The extras are supposed to pick up right where the Production Diaries left off.  So if you want the whole story of the "making-of", better plunk down the ~$30 to get those...

As for the cover-art of the 2-disc set, I'm sure someone will make a custom that rivals either of the two official covers.

SON OF A B**CH!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I am now convinced Universal doesn't give two s**ts about their consumers needs.

Hopefully the second cover art isn't offical, I don't mind it, but they could have a been a bit more creative. Anyways i'm going to buy this awesome movie, very beautiful!

Hopefully Universal will let him do a deluxe treatment, but I seriously doubt it. I'm shocked though because Universal along with Dreamworks and New Line are the top distributors for DVD's with DTS. I just assume that since Cinderella Man and Ray were both done in this same fashion that these will be the only releases.

I'll definately buy this since it was such a big movie, I haven't seen it yet because I cannot watch a movie over 2:30 in a theater. The animation looks amazing and I'm sure i'll enjoy it but I don't like either of the artworks it could be so much better and I saw someone say how the 2 disc art is the same and how they didnt like it and I agree even if they used the same art they could jazz it up a bit ahah they're making the single disc look nicer! =]

Excellent, the two disc'er will be mine!

Cover art is good, I'm definately buying this, 2nd Best of 2005! I dont know... I'm thinking of getting the 1-disker and hope they get an extended edtion, but I will most likely get the 2-Disker anyway....

I smell revisions on the way.

Just noticed that the difference in price between the 1 & 2 disc editions is $1!

Surely no-one would object to paying an extra $1 for the extra features. That is ridiculous. Its about £0.60p in UK money!

Liked the film. but feel no inclination to buy it. Maybe catch it in a couple of years time once I have forgotten it. Dont particularly want to buy every film I watch. Seems everyone esle does.

The film may 'star' Jack Black, Naomi Watts and Adrien Brody but you wouldn't know it from the artwork!

Sorry but, no DTS = no sale.

I can wait for the 'definitive' release.

Awesome cover art... I can't wait to see what else they have to show behind the scenes. The Production Diaries were amazing.

I like the 2 disc art, but I hate the one disc.  I'll be getting the 2 disc.

I wish it would come in a tin like the ezydvd exclusive. I will still be buying the 2 disc on release day.

awesome movie but I don't think I will be buying it

Will they be packaging the 2-Disc with the "Production Diaries" that was released in time for the theatrical release?

I am definately buying this.

and I was amazed I got the first post