King Kong: Deluxe Extended Edition (UK - DVD R2)
King Kong makes his returns to DVD... and now he's bigger, louder and uncut
Since Peter Jackson is seemingly incapable of making short movies any more, the DVD-buying public is often treated to multiple releases of his feature films; with extended editions that incorporate additional scenes and add to the, already lengthy, running time. While this worked for the highly successful Lord of the Rings series, it remains to be seen whether this revised DVD of King Kong will fare quite so well.
Considering the huge success of the Tolkien adaptations, the response that greeted Jackon's version of King Kong could be described as strangely apathetic. Perhaps audiences were suffering a case of deja vu, as remaking the original 1933 film had already been attempted in 1976, and not with any great aplomb. Despite a huge marketing drive, the Monkey Movie was ultimately beaten at the box office by The Chronicles of Narnia, which was, ironically, an attempt to ride the fantasy wave created by Jackson's productions of The Lord of the Rings.
A rather large primate falls in love with a blonde, throws a hissy fit and falls off the empire state building...Does the storyline of King Kong really require much elaboration? Well, it does if your name is Peter Jackson, which is why, in this version of the classic story we're treated to countless character arcs; most of which feel decidedly unnecessary.
Things start off promisingly enough with the introduction of our characters. Ann Darrow (Naomi Watts) is our damsel in distress, Jack Driscoll (Adrien Brody) is our unlikely hero and Carl Denham (Jack Black) is our comic-relief/bad guy. Effectively, each of these characters is well-written with multiple facets and a nice amount of development. The problems start when our supporting characters are afforded the same luxury.
The Fellowship of the Kong includes Jimmy (Jamie Bell), Hayes (Evan Park) and Lumpy (Andy Serkis). Like our protagonists, these characters are given endless scenes of dialogue in a bloated portion of the film which takes place on the ship to Skull Island. But after spending so much time in fleshing out these characters, the movie then discards them for the final section of the film.
Another problem is that the entire movie plays out like a love-letter to the original. There are countless references to the 1933 version which would not be so bad were it not for the fact that this remake only rarely deviates from the story. The only real difference is that each scene tends to last about three times longer.
The real purpose of remaking this sort of film is that old excuse of ‘the technology being far superior, so we can do this sort of thing much better’. Oddly enough, the special effects in this version aren't that astounding. When Skull Island's inhabitants of beasts and creepy crawlies are the only thing on-screen it's all very nice to look at. Unfortunately, when they're called to interact with our human cast, things look almost ropey; with the dinosaur stampede looking slightly shaky.
So, what about the additional content? Just how special is this extended edition? Well, there's not a huge amount here that you didn't see in the cinema—or at least that's what it feels like, as the extra stuff mainly consists of dialogue dotted here and there. Of more interest are three new sequences which all feature more of Skull Island's pesky critters. It’s nothing to write home about, but worth a watch regardless.
King Kong isn't a bad movie by any stretch of the imagination; the acting is fine and the production is polished. Unfortunately, it's also decidedly undisciplined. Just as J.K Rowling seems unable to write a regular length children's book, Peter Jackson seems to have lost the ability to make a decent paced feature film. After all, the 1933 film that he clearly loves so much managed to tell the same story in almost half the screen time.
As with the previous DVD version, King Kong has been treated to an 2.35:1 anamorphic widescreen presentation, but fans will be pleased to know that the extra scenes are indistinguishable from those that made the theatrical cut. Darker colours are exceptionally well contrasted and skin-tones are well presented.
The lack of DTS will mean that many fans will never class this release as 'the definitive version' but, for what its worth, the 5.1 Dolby digital track is near faultless. There's a nice use of surround sound for the numerous set-pieces on Skull Island and in New York City and dialogue is presented with clarity. Crank up the volume and you're in for a near-theatrical presentation.
If you haven't had your fill of additional scenes, then the first port of call should be the huge list of deleted sequences on disc one. Alarmingly, most of these were cut from the boat sequences, meaning that this part of the film was even longer in the script. There are a few nice touches to be found throughout, but it does feel like a definite case of overkill.
It may take a considerable amount of patience to make your way through the commentary featuring Peter Jackson and Philippa Boyens for, while it a worthy chat-track, its length means that it is quite an undertaking. Perhaps the best aspect of this is that both Jackson and Boyens contributed to the screenplay so they can give us some genuine insight into the development of the characters and the numerous narrative choices they made to differentiate this from the previous versions of the story.
If you're fond of goofs then ‘The Eighth Blunder of the World’ should be a pleasing way to kill nineteen minutes. This montage of bloopers is never hilarious, but does showcase the good atmosphere present on set.
Prior to the release of the film, a vast amount of ‘making of’ footage found its way to the web in the form of ‘Production Diaries’. One of them, presented here, never made it due to the content featured. One to file in the category for 'amusing' rather than 'insightful'.
The opening of the movie showcases a variety of Vaudeville stage acts. A short featurette details how the second unit auditioned the acts involved. This gives audiences a chance to see many of the performances which were cut short, although whether such acts could be described as ‘enjoyable’ purely depends on the viewer's point of view.
If you missed the many, many references to the 1933 original version of King Kong, a ten minute featurette which details the numerous homages is on hand.
Moving on to disc two and you'll find a collection of trailers and two scripts which were written in various stages of the film's long production history (dated 1996 and 2005).
‘Animatics’ are one the strangest of all DVD extras, presenting a cartoon vision of how the crew intend to film certain scenes. The scenes in question all closely resemble the animatics shown here; although whether anyone, aside from wannabe film-makers, would bother giving them a second watch is up for debate.
Fans of collectibles will be interested by the featurette which delves into the world of Weta, one of the most respected makers of movie memorabilia. It's very short, but worth a look for the fanboys.
The camaraderie on set is showcased even more so with the short film ‘The Present’, which details how Jack Black and various other cast members shot a short film to give to Peter Jackson on his birthday. It's one of the most entertaining featurettes contained over the three discs.
Perhaps the biggest incentive for fans to make the upgrade to the extended edition is the three-hour documentary that can be found on the third disc. This can be viewed by separate chapters or in its entirety. This is about a thorough as a documentary can ever get, and although it's a little overwhelming, the commitment to give detail to every aspect of the film-making process (from early pre-production to Peter Jackson's final thoughts) should be applauded.
Finally, we conclude things with the ‘Conceptual Design Galleries’. Once again, this will be of more interest to those with a strong interest in film-making as opposed to a general viewing audience.
An exhaustive supply of extras means that fans of the film may be inclined to trade in their existing DVD for this revised special edition. Alas, the extended cut itself only highlights what was wrong with the film when it was shown in cinemas. It's an enjoyable fantasy, but there's always the feeling that half the runtime would make twice the movie.
Considering the huge success of the Tolkien adaptations, the response that greeted Jackon's version of King Kong could be described as strangely apathetic. Perhaps audiences were suffering a case of deja vu, as remaking the original 1933 film had already been attempted in 1976, and not with any great aplomb. Despite a huge marketing drive, the Monkey Movie was ultimately beaten at the box office by The Chronicles of Narnia, which was, ironically, an attempt to ride the fantasy wave created by Jackson's productions of The Lord of the Rings.
Feature
A rather large primate falls in love with a blonde, throws a hissy fit and falls off the empire state building...Does the storyline of King Kong really require much elaboration? Well, it does if your name is Peter Jackson, which is why, in this version of the classic story we're treated to countless character arcs; most of which feel decidedly unnecessary.
Things start off promisingly enough with the introduction of our characters. Ann Darrow (Naomi Watts) is our damsel in distress, Jack Driscoll (Adrien Brody) is our unlikely hero and Carl Denham (Jack Black) is our comic-relief/bad guy. Effectively, each of these characters is well-written with multiple facets and a nice amount of development. The problems start when our supporting characters are afforded the same luxury.
The Fellowship of the Kong includes Jimmy (Jamie Bell), Hayes (Evan Park) and Lumpy (Andy Serkis). Like our protagonists, these characters are given endless scenes of dialogue in a bloated portion of the film which takes place on the ship to Skull Island. But after spending so much time in fleshing out these characters, the movie then discards them for the final section of the film.
Another problem is that the entire movie plays out like a love-letter to the original. There are countless references to the 1933 version which would not be so bad were it not for the fact that this remake only rarely deviates from the story. The only real difference is that each scene tends to last about three times longer.
The real purpose of remaking this sort of film is that old excuse of ‘the technology being far superior, so we can do this sort of thing much better’. Oddly enough, the special effects in this version aren't that astounding. When Skull Island's inhabitants of beasts and creepy crawlies are the only thing on-screen it's all very nice to look at. Unfortunately, when they're called to interact with our human cast, things look almost ropey; with the dinosaur stampede looking slightly shaky.
So, what about the additional content? Just how special is this extended edition? Well, there's not a huge amount here that you didn't see in the cinema—or at least that's what it feels like, as the extra stuff mainly consists of dialogue dotted here and there. Of more interest are three new sequences which all feature more of Skull Island's pesky critters. It’s nothing to write home about, but worth a watch regardless.
King Kong isn't a bad movie by any stretch of the imagination; the acting is fine and the production is polished. Unfortunately, it's also decidedly undisciplined. Just as J.K Rowling seems unable to write a regular length children's book, Peter Jackson seems to have lost the ability to make a decent paced feature film. After all, the 1933 film that he clearly loves so much managed to tell the same story in almost half the screen time.
Video
As with the previous DVD version, King Kong has been treated to an 2.35:1 anamorphic widescreen presentation, but fans will be pleased to know that the extra scenes are indistinguishable from those that made the theatrical cut. Darker colours are exceptionally well contrasted and skin-tones are well presented.
Audio
The lack of DTS will mean that many fans will never class this release as 'the definitive version' but, for what its worth, the 5.1 Dolby digital track is near faultless. There's a nice use of surround sound for the numerous set-pieces on Skull Island and in New York City and dialogue is presented with clarity. Crank up the volume and you're in for a near-theatrical presentation.
Extras
If you haven't had your fill of additional scenes, then the first port of call should be the huge list of deleted sequences on disc one. Alarmingly, most of these were cut from the boat sequences, meaning that this part of the film was even longer in the script. There are a few nice touches to be found throughout, but it does feel like a definite case of overkill.
It may take a considerable amount of patience to make your way through the commentary featuring Peter Jackson and Philippa Boyens for, while it a worthy chat-track, its length means that it is quite an undertaking. Perhaps the best aspect of this is that both Jackson and Boyens contributed to the screenplay so they can give us some genuine insight into the development of the characters and the numerous narrative choices they made to differentiate this from the previous versions of the story.
If you're fond of goofs then ‘The Eighth Blunder of the World’ should be a pleasing way to kill nineteen minutes. This montage of bloopers is never hilarious, but does showcase the good atmosphere present on set.
Prior to the release of the film, a vast amount of ‘making of’ footage found its way to the web in the form of ‘Production Diaries’. One of them, presented here, never made it due to the content featured. One to file in the category for 'amusing' rather than 'insightful'.
The opening of the movie showcases a variety of Vaudeville stage acts. A short featurette details how the second unit auditioned the acts involved. This gives audiences a chance to see many of the performances which were cut short, although whether such acts could be described as ‘enjoyable’ purely depends on the viewer's point of view.
If you missed the many, many references to the 1933 original version of King Kong, a ten minute featurette which details the numerous homages is on hand.
Moving on to disc two and you'll find a collection of trailers and two scripts which were written in various stages of the film's long production history (dated 1996 and 2005).
‘Animatics’ are one the strangest of all DVD extras, presenting a cartoon vision of how the crew intend to film certain scenes. The scenes in question all closely resemble the animatics shown here; although whether anyone, aside from wannabe film-makers, would bother giving them a second watch is up for debate.
Fans of collectibles will be interested by the featurette which delves into the world of Weta, one of the most respected makers of movie memorabilia. It's very short, but worth a look for the fanboys.
The camaraderie on set is showcased even more so with the short film ‘The Present’, which details how Jack Black and various other cast members shot a short film to give to Peter Jackson on his birthday. It's one of the most entertaining featurettes contained over the three discs.
Perhaps the biggest incentive for fans to make the upgrade to the extended edition is the three-hour documentary that can be found on the third disc. This can be viewed by separate chapters or in its entirety. This is about a thorough as a documentary can ever get, and although it's a little overwhelming, the commitment to give detail to every aspect of the film-making process (from early pre-production to Peter Jackson's final thoughts) should be applauded.
Finally, we conclude things with the ‘Conceptual Design Galleries’. Once again, this will be of more interest to those with a strong interest in film-making as opposed to a general viewing audience.
Overall
An exhaustive supply of extras means that fans of the film may be inclined to trade in their existing DVD for this revised special edition. Alas, the extended cut itself only highlights what was wrong with the film when it was shown in cinemas. It's an enjoyable fantasy, but there's always the feeling that half the runtime would make twice the movie.
Review by Peter Martin
Advertisements
Existing Posts
said Chris_Gould,
Quote: What really annoyed me about this film was the way that they built up the supporting cast, then ditched them without a second thought in the final act. WTF was the point of that? There was just no emotional pay-off...
I absolutely agree !! I have no trouble with the length and extra detail, but this aspect of it really annoyed me. Jackson and Walsh on the commentary say that they didn't want to have nameless faces just being stomped by dinosaurs, which I think I understand, albeit am amb ivalent about. But instead, we've got named faces being stomped by dinosaurs, characters we've come to know to some degree just being thrown away cavalierly, so what's the point ?!
Or, as Chris points out, once the story needs to move off the island again, they just .. disappear. No emotional pay-off, no closure on their plot threads. Colin Hanks' charac ter, for instance, served no purpose in the story and, for all his screen time, never even got a character arc, not even a little bend of a one. He just got to look sulky and reproachful in the build-up to the climax of the story, and then he's gone. And was it just me, or was Jack Black's character arc as shapeless as his waistline ? We were given lots of character notes throughout the movie (albeit in the same key most of the time), but it never really came together to anything satisfying.
I would go so far as saying that, for me, there was no final cadence for any one of the human characters in the movie.
Quote: What really annoyed me about this film was the way that they built up the supporting cast, then ditched them without a second thought in the final act. WTF was the point of that? There was just no emotional pay-off...
I absolutely agree !! I have no trouble with the length and extra detail, but this aspect of it really annoyed me. Jackson and Walsh on the commentary say that they didn't want to have nameless faces just being stomped by dinosaurs, which I think I understand, albeit am amb ivalent about. But instead, we've got named faces being stomped by dinosaurs, characters we've come to know to some degree just being thrown away cavalierly, so what's the point ?!
Or, as Chris points out, once the story needs to move off the island again, they just .. disappear. No emotional pay-off, no closure on their plot threads. Colin Hanks' charac ter, for instance, served no purpose in the story and, for all his screen time, never even got a character arc, not even a little bend of a one. He just got to look sulky and reproachful in the build-up to the climax of the story, and then he's gone. And was it just me, or was Jack Black's character arc as shapeless as his waistline ? We were given lots of character notes throughout the movie (albeit in the same key most of the time), but it never really came together to anything satisfying.
I would go so far as saying that, for me, there was no final cadence for any one of the human characters in the movie.
Is it worth selling/trading in the 2-disc to get this?
I'm still undecided about picking this one up. I like the original but I can't imagine wanting to watch an even longer cut. However, the extra features sound intriguing.
Are you still here?
Anyway, I just finished up the special features last night, and was very satisfied. I never saw the extras on the original release, nor did I ever see the production diaries, but this seemed like enough info. The doc was solid. This might make my year end best, at least until I finally get that three-disc Oldboy...
Anyway, I just finished up the special features last night, and was very satisfied. I never saw the extras on the original release, nor did I ever see the production diaries, but this seemed like enough info. The doc was solid. This might make my year end best, at least until I finally get that three-disc Oldboy...
I am going to get it too. I must see the extra scenes and the info on how Peter Jackson made this excellent movie.
AdolfSutler and King Kong
Gabe Powers wrote: AdolfSutler wrote: Sorry but anyone who doesn't like this movie is an idiot and is someone who can't appreciate great filmmaking. The fools were probably expecting a mindless action movie. Or they are probably Lucas or Spielberg fanboys.
Word of advice: if you're going to be an asshole at least have conviction, don't proceed your asinine blanket statement insult with the word "sorry".
Oh, and "sorry" but anyone who doesn't have the mental capacity to understand that other human beings may have different opinions from one's own is an idiot whose opinon I'll take with less than a grain of salt.
On another note, the R1 DVD case is pretty ugly. The outter shell is like an ad for the disc, where once opened, can't ever be entirely reclosed, and the inside case looks like a bootlegg. Really awful and lazy graphic design work.
Gabe, that twit is a flaming troll from IMDB. He's just a 12yo kid playing games.
Now about this version of "King Kong". Thanks to all who have given their info (except AdolfSutler of course). I'm definitely goin to get this extended version.
Word of advice: if you're going to be an asshole at least have conviction, don't proceed your asinine blanket statement insult with the word "sorry".
Oh, and "sorry" but anyone who doesn't have the mental capacity to understand that other human beings may have different opinions from one's own is an idiot whose opinon I'll take with less than a grain of salt.
On another note, the R1 DVD case is pretty ugly. The outter shell is like an ad for the disc, where once opened, can't ever be entirely reclosed, and the inside case looks like a bootlegg. Really awful and lazy graphic design work.
Gabe, that twit is a flaming troll from IMDB. He's just a 12yo kid playing games.
Now about this version of "King Kong". Thanks to all who have given their info (except AdolfSutler of course). I'm definitely goin to get this extended version.
AdolfSutler wrote: Sorry but anyone who doesn't like this movie is an idiot and is someone who can't appreciate great filmmaking. The fools were probably expecting a mindless action movie. Or they are probably Lucas or Spielberg fanboys.
This guy did this on the imdb.com message boards for the movie.
Anyway, I liked this movie. I really want to get a look at the extended edition.
This guy did this on the imdb.com message boards for the movie.
Anyway, I liked this movie. I really want to get a look at the extended edition.
I don't know- When I saw KK in the theatre, I was absolutely blown away. I even though it was one of the best films that this decade had to offer so far. But like some above posters have mentioned, on DVD the magic seems to be abscent from the film- and the 3 hours that seemed to short in the cinema seem unbearable on DVD. The Extended Cut, I know will only further my frustration, so I'll stay away from it!
Overlong and way overated already, this was not needed at all. The film shouldve been 2 hours long and had the boring 'character' moments of characters who were gonna die half an hour later (5 mins in any other film) cut entirely. That said the end sequence is truly brilliant and it COULD have been a great movie if it was cut shorter. I may still rent this on a lazy Sunday afternoon, but its certainly not worth a buy. But the extras sound great.
A film can be 10 hours long if it wants too - but I would prefer to be entertained not bored to death during the experience.
To be frank the last time I saw KK in Christmas I loved it, and didn't notice the running time at all. I look forward to getting this set: thank goodness it's not too extended. PJ's a king with DVD extras too.
Again, a throroughly detailed & perceptive review & many divided opinions, mine's in unfortunately a rant. Despite the subject, this is not an epic story & should have lasted no longer than 2hrs. The ridiculous action sequences were mimicking video game territory & surely Niaomi Watts' character would have a severed spine after all that tossing (careful!). The subplot with Jaime Bell was lost, totally unneccessary. The film has potential, but needs to be halfed.
As did I, and that had a director's cut that actually improved the film.
I prefered The Frighteners...
Yeah, I should stress that I don't see anything wrong with *long* films, just films that aren't particularly well paced.
Surely even the bigger fans of the film can admit that the voyage to Skull Island is mercilessly overlong? Building a sense of anticipation is important, sure, but you don't have to spend quite so long doing it. We came here to see the King, after all...
Surely even the bigger fans of the film can admit that the voyage to Skull Island is mercilessly overlong? Building a sense of anticipation is important, sure, but you don't have to spend quite so long doing it. We came here to see the King, after all...
i like the film. it is overly long, but its alright, that was he he saw he film and I respect that. I actually own the standard single-disc dvd so I might pick this up sometime but maybe not. I do prefer "King Kong" to all three of the Lord of the Rings films, but thats just me.
I picked up this film today. I liked KK, but definately thought it needed to be trimmed in a few areas. I didn't have a problem with length (for the film as a whole) but some of the scenes ran a bit long, and some of the SFX were a bit over the top, almost excessive at times. The animation and art design are simply beautiful, and Kong looks about as real as he could possibly be. I appreciate Jackson's love for this movie, and the homage he presented, but there were a few moments, where things just ran a tad too long. Nevertheless, I look forward to watching it again this weekend on my 8 foot screen. That is always fun.
AdolfSutler wrote: Sorry but anyone who doesn't like this movie is an idiot and is someone who can't appreciate great filmmaking. The fools were probably expecting a mindless action movie. Or they are probably Lucas or Spielberg fanboys.
Word of advice: if you're going to be an asshole at least have conviction, don't proceed your asinine blanket statement insult with the word "sorry".
Oh, and "sorry" but anyone who doesn't have the mental capacity to understand that other human beings may have different opinions from one's own is an idiot whose opinon I'll take with less than a grain of salt.
On another note, the R1 DVD case is pretty ugly. The outter shell is like an ad for the disc, where once opened, can't ever be entirely reclosed, and the inside case looks like a bootlegg. Really awful and lazy graphic design work.
Word of advice: if you're going to be an asshole at least have conviction, don't proceed your asinine blanket statement insult with the word "sorry".
Oh, and "sorry" but anyone who doesn't have the mental capacity to understand that other human beings may have different opinions from one's own is an idiot whose opinon I'll take with less than a grain of salt.
On another note, the R1 DVD case is pretty ugly. The outter shell is like an ad for the disc, where once opened, can't ever be entirely reclosed, and the inside case looks like a bootlegg. Really awful and lazy graphic design work.
How many people had a hard time getting the discs out of the case? The holders are not the regular ridged ones, softer plastic. You would think that would be better. Nope. I hyper-extended the discs trying to get them out. I'm at a loss to find a solution, other than exchanging the box for another and hoping it fairs better.
I loved the film but to be accurate Spielberg doesn't make mindless action movies.
Lets also not forget the original isn't exactly high brow. This is what it is "a cracking monster movie".
I think people forget the original was an action of the 1930s.
Lets also not forget the original isn't exactly high brow. This is what it is "a cracking monster movie".
I think people forget the original was an action of the 1930s.
Sorry but anyone who doesn't like this movie is an idiot and is someone who can't appreciate great filmmaking. The fools were probably expecting a mindless action movie. Or they are probably Lucas or Spielberg fanboys.
Cracking set but does it really have to come in 3 waste of space keep cases? I also wish it was on 1 DVD-9 (the film).
Rant over this looks awesome and shall be mine :-D
Rant over this looks awesome and shall be mine :-D
I had ABLSOLUTLY no problem with the original cits' run time. It it's one of the best movies of 2005! So, with that said, I'm picking it up today.
To be honest, I really enjoyed this film at the cinema and felt it was funny in places, tense in places, and had really impressive action sequences. That's a personal opinion and refers to the theatrical cut as I've yet to see the extended edition.
I know that a lot of people don't agree with this, but King Kong worked for me at the length it was in its theatrical incarnation, and to be honest, I didn't even mind the Jimmy/Lumpy etc secondary characters. Their development made me care more about what happened to the crew than the comparatively anonymous deaths that took place on the way to find Ann in the 1933 version. By the way, I'm a huge fan of the 1933 version too and don't mean to imply that I view it as anything less than a 5-star classic.
Wouldn't mind checking this out when it drops in price in a sale, but I'm not as eager to see it as I was to see the LOTR Extended Editions, as I'm not convinced that anything new will add a huge amount to the film.
I know that a lot of people don't agree with this, but King Kong worked for me at the length it was in its theatrical incarnation, and to be honest, I didn't even mind the Jimmy/Lumpy etc secondary characters. Their development made me care more about what happened to the crew than the comparatively anonymous deaths that took place on the way to find Ann in the 1933 version. By the way, I'm a huge fan of the 1933 version too and don't mean to imply that I view it as anything less than a 5-star classic.
Wouldn't mind checking this out when it drops in price in a sale, but I'm not as eager to see it as I was to see the LOTR Extended Editions, as I'm not convinced that anything new will add a huge amount to the film.
For some reason I loved this film when I saw it in theatres, but I just can't sit through it on DVD. Heck, I can sit through the LOTR's extended ones, but just not King Kong. . .
King Kong was a good movie, far superior to the 76 remake and a great homage to the original.
However, I could have done with a shorter dinosaur stamped and done without the nasty giant critters attack, which IMHO, don't serve the movie in any positive way. Cut those two scenes down, and you get a fantastic movie.
However, I could have done with a shorter dinosaur stamped and done without the nasty giant critters attack, which IMHO, don't serve the movie in any positive way. Cut those two scenes down, and you get a fantastic movie.
I liked King Kong more than most people, and picked up this DVD today. I think that Raplph is correct in his assesment of the special effects, and the fact that ROTS was robbed of a nomination.
As far as running time, ramalho, a film can be as long as it wants, but whereas the LOTR films filled out their epic lengths, King Kong had a lot of fat worth trimming. It was a problem with a lot of films since the success of LOTR and Harry Potter. Munich, Superman, King Kong, among others, were good to great films with too many moot moments and go nowhere scenes.
As far as running time, ramalho, a film can be as long as it wants, but whereas the LOTR films filled out their epic lengths, King Kong had a lot of fat worth trimming. It was a problem with a lot of films since the success of LOTR and Harry Potter. Munich, Superman, King Kong, among others, were good to great films with too many moot moments and go nowhere scenes.
barnabyjones wrote: I can't believe this got the Oscar for SFX, there are some truly shoddy moments in here.
The standards of the visual effects aren't consistent throughout. Agreed, the brontos look ok in the panning shots, but up-close with the humans, they really don't blend! But the giant bugs, the close-ups of the T-Rex as it raises its head towards Ann, and of course King Kong himself all meant the film had an overall high quality.
I don't get why this won and Episode III wasn't even nominated though. For me, that had far superior special effects and was the best of the year in that category (excluding Sin City, but the Academy refused to recognise that on principle).
The standards of the visual effects aren't consistent throughout. Agreed, the brontos look ok in the panning shots, but up-close with the humans, they really don't blend! But the giant bugs, the close-ups of the T-Rex as it raises its head towards Ann, and of course King Kong himself all meant the film had an overall high quality.
I don't get why this won and Episode III wasn't even nominated though. For me, that had far superior special effects and was the best of the year in that category (excluding Sin City, but the Academy refused to recognise that on principle).
I can't believe this got the Oscar for SFX, there are some truly shoddy moments in here.
dbeamish wrote: Nice review Peter. Personally I thought the normal cut was too long, with too many CG effects and was too over the top in terms of absurdity so I can't see how an extended edition would change any of that for me. All the multpile T-Rex stuff and dinosaur stampede were the bits that really killed it for me.
GET OUT! KK is beautiful piece of work!
GET OUT! KK is beautiful piece of work!
Running time...running time...is this the only argument people can give?"he could make the same movie for half the length".My point is,why should he?What's this aversion with long movies that people have?Is it that their I.Q can't sustain to be concentraded for more than 90 minutes?
Film length seems to be everyones crutch on what's bad on a movie:"the pace is too slow".Well some movies are not meant to be fast paced(although this one definetley is)a longer running time is not criteria enough to applaud or condemn a film.What matter is what's in it not your timetables.
Seriously the movie has it's problems:it's a tad clichéd and predictable and there is no pay off for the considerable time spent at developing supporting characters,but that does not translate to film length.Scenes should be in or out depending on their quality and not because they make the film longer.
I know i'm defending this film all the time but the fact is even though I really like it I don't think it's a masterpiece.What i'm defending is it's length.Seriously most guys reading this site spend all day either in front of a television or computer,so what's the matter with a long movie?Just pretend It's a tv series-you never hear people complaining the TV show they just bought is too long(although they do ask for a final resolution when there is a diminish in subsequent seasons that don't seem to end)
As I said,Kong is a very good movie but not an excellent one,but it would be very hard to be any better given the material,i mean it's not Casablanca.The original was ahead of it's time and technically very influential but it's still a monster movie(albeit,one with a heart).The reason for it's defense by me is that i'm sick of people complaining about movies being too long or too slow.If you don't have the time don't see it,if you're too into MTV don't watch it,stop blaiming movies because of your lack of concentration.
This is not directed at the reviewer but at everyone.If you don't like the movie fine,but stop using the excuse"It's too long"if there are scenes that shouldn't be there O.K,but as I said that has nothing to do with film length.
Film length seems to be everyones crutch on what's bad on a movie:"the pace is too slow".Well some movies are not meant to be fast paced(although this one definetley is)a longer running time is not criteria enough to applaud or condemn a film.What matter is what's in it not your timetables.
Seriously the movie has it's problems:it's a tad clichéd and predictable and there is no pay off for the considerable time spent at developing supporting characters,but that does not translate to film length.Scenes should be in or out depending on their quality and not because they make the film longer.
I know i'm defending this film all the time but the fact is even though I really like it I don't think it's a masterpiece.What i'm defending is it's length.Seriously most guys reading this site spend all day either in front of a television or computer,so what's the matter with a long movie?Just pretend It's a tv series-you never hear people complaining the TV show they just bought is too long(although they do ask for a final resolution when there is a diminish in subsequent seasons that don't seem to end)
As I said,Kong is a very good movie but not an excellent one,but it would be very hard to be any better given the material,i mean it's not Casablanca.The original was ahead of it's time and technically very influential but it's still a monster movie(albeit,one with a heart).The reason for it's defense by me is that i'm sick of people complaining about movies being too long or too slow.If you don't have the time don't see it,if you're too into MTV don't watch it,stop blaiming movies because of your lack of concentration.
This is not directed at the reviewer but at everyone.If you don't like the movie fine,but stop using the excuse"It's too long"if there are scenes that shouldn't be there O.K,but as I said that has nothing to do with film length.
good job Peter..although I don't agree with your opinion a bit 
i loved that film as great popcorn, relax movie. I enjoyed it much more than...FOR ME (IN MY OPINION) c**py and trully boring LOTR series.
When you treat this film, as an action-adventure entertaining movie, not any ambitious pice of cinema..then I think it makes his goal just fine.
But that is just my point of view
oo..and as for Cg..u realy think it lacks anything.??
i loved that film as great popcorn, relax movie. I enjoyed it much more than...FOR ME (IN MY OPINION) c**py and trully boring LOTR series.
When you treat this film, as an action-adventure entertaining movie, not any ambitious pice of cinema..then I think it makes his goal just fine.
But that is just my point of view
oo..and as for Cg..u realy think it lacks anything.??
What really annoyed me about this film was the way that they built up the supporting cast, then ditched them without a second thought in the final act. WTF was the point of that? There was just no emotional pay-off...
Nice review Peter. Personally I thought the normal cut was too long, with too many CG effects and was too over the top in terms of absurdity so I can't see how an extended edition would change any of that for me. All the multpile T-Rex stuff and dinosaur stampede were the bits that really killed it for me.
Suitable only for persons of 12 years and over
Disc Details
Release Date:
13th November 2006
Discs:
3
Disc Type:
Single side, dual layer
RCE:
No
Video:
PAL
Aspect:
2.35:1
Anamorphic:
Yes
Colour:
Yes
Audio:
Dolby Digital 5.1 English, Dolby Digital 5.1 French, Dolby Digital 5.1 German
Subtitles:
English SDH, French, German, Danish, Finish, Norwegian and Swedish
Extras:
Audio Commentary from Peter Jackson and Philippa Boyens, Deleted Scenes, Outtakes Featurette, 'A Night in Vaudeville' Featurette, Homages Featurette, 'The Missing Production Diary', Short Film, Animatics, Weta Featurette, DVD-Rom Scripts, Trailers, Making of Documentary, Introduction by Peter Jackson
Easter Egg:
No
Feature Details
Director:
Peter Jackson
Cast:
Naomi Watts, Adrien Brody, Jack Black, Andy Serkis, Jamie Bell
Genre:
Drama and Fantasy
Length:
194 minutes
Ratings
Awards
Amazon.com
FOLLOW DVDACTIVE
Follow our updates
OTHER INTERESTING STUFF
Reviewer Agony
Loser
US - DVD R1
Cannibals
US - DVD R1
Norliss Tapes, The
US - DVD R1
Doctor Who: The Mutants
UK - DVD R2
George A Romero Presents : Dead Time Stories Volume 1
UK - DVD R2
Hot Articles
Star Wars: The Changes - Part One
DVD | BD
Star Wars: The Changes - Part Three
DVD
Star Wars: The Changes - Part Two
DVD
Star Wars: Top 20 Moments
DVD
DVD is dead. Long live the DVD!
DVD
Hot Interviews
Most Talked About
More Scream Factory News
US - BD RA
Texas Chainsaw (2013, 2D)
US - BD RA
Spring Breakers
US - DVD R1 | BD RA
Host, The
US - DVD R1 | BD RA
Universal Steelbooks
US - BD RA
