Re: Kong Sad

Rich wrote:

On Wed, 29 Mar 2006 20:55:00 -0800, "John Doe II"
<firsTraveler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


Kong isn't a King any more, just an oversized gorilla. No wonder the film stalled out short of $600 mil global box.

The first 55 minutes are tedious at best. Naomi Watts is poorly cast as Anne, though almost anyone from modern Hollywood is going to play it way to modern. Once we get to the island the action is entertaining, particularly the dino stampede; the giant bugs could have been skipped. The chase seen in New York is a riot, having the streets icy was a great idea. And the finale air-assault should have won an Oscar.

Of the three versions of King Kong, the original reins supreme.



Interesting that in two different monkey movies (King Kong, 1979 and
King Kong, 2005) two gifted actresses came off poorly.
-Rich

And I thought just the opposite. I thought they both came off wonderfully. In fact, Jessica Lange was the only good thing about the 1976 version.

--
Alric Knebel
.