King Kong

[biological warrior]

Ok fella's just wanted to know if anyone has seen the King Kong movie.
Are there any reviews? Im thinking of seeing it tonite but wanted to know what people thought about the movie before going.

[jeff061]

Every review I've seen has been very positive.

[Buccaneer]

Every review I've seen has been very positive.
Go figure.

Apparently this monstrosity (pun intended) of CGI overload (for a period piece?!?!?) is doing "poorly" at the box-office so far, at least from news reports.

[jeff061]

Yeah, only 9 million Wednesday. It may end up being the only movie all year I check out in the theater.

[Bad-example]

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/reviews/movies/KINGKONG.DTL&type=printable

The SF Chronicle hated it.

There's a dinosaur stampede, several giant spider invasions and an attack by creatures that look like angry penises with teeth. The audience is invited to witness peril and mourn the deaths of characters no one cares about. I didn't clock it, but at least an hour is spent on the island, and it's the same action repeated over and over: There's a monster, certain doom, a surprising escape. At one point, King Kong fights off three T-Rexes with one hand, while holding Ann in his other like an ice cream cone. Even that goes on too long.

[biological warrior]

I guess as long as its faithful and, historically accurate to the real event then Im sold.

[oliegirl]

I wanted to see this, but now I am wondering if it's one of those movies that the critics love for whatever reason, but has no real appeal to mass audiences. I'll probably end up seeing it anyway, but I have lowered my standards and expectations since hearing "man on the street" reviews.

[jeff061]

Old faithful:
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/king_kong/

[cthomer5000]

I wanted to see this, but now I am wondering if it's one of those movies that the critics love for whatever reason, but has no real appeal to mass audiences. I'll probably end up seeing it anyway, but I have lowered my standards and expectations since hearing "man on the street" reviews.
Wow, that's hilarious that good reviews had made you reconsider initially.

[TargetPractice6]

I saw it with a group of about eight people and we all loved it.

[oliegirl]

Wow, that's hilarious that good reviews had made you reconsider initially.

Maybe I mispoke, I wanted to see it based on all the great "buzz" it was getting before it was released...the press loved it. But I haven't heard many good things about it from people that have seen it. I think this weekend is a do-or-die for the movie...it cost over $200 million to make, it has a lot of tickets to sell before it's in the black

[cthomer5000]

Maybe I mispoke, I wanted to see it based on all the great "buzz" it was getting before it was released...the press loved it. But I haven't heard many good things about it from people that have seen it. I think this weekend is a do-or-die for the movie...it cost over $200 million to make, it has a lot of tickets to sell before it's in the black
It'll be fine. Even it it only makes 100 million in the US, it'll make a killing internationally and on DVD. I guarantee no one is sweating the box office numbers.

[larrymcg421]

It'll be fine. Even it it only makes 100 million in the US, it'll make a killing internationally and on DVD. I guarantee no one is sweating the box office numbers.

It will easily make 100 million. While the 9 million opening on Wednesday is lower than other event pictures, it's still a pretty good draw. It will still have a pretty big weekend and I'd expect it to actually increase next weekend when the holiday movie season really starts. I'd say it's definitely headed to over $200 million domestically. But you're definitely right, I think this will easily clear $1 billion overseas.

[WrongWay]

Looking at the Rotten Tomatoes site:

Funny I can not find a negative review about the movie's acting, writing, producing, directing, or special effects. I do see negative reviews about movies over 3 hours though.

[biological warrior]

Just got back from seeing it! It seemed like a movie made by a guy ''who loved movies.'' It was pretty faithful to the original and, historically accurate. The movie also added new questions and, depth to the movie (old map...clues to ''other'' Kongs et. ala). Really brought up some questions regarding love, colonialism and, taking opportunity out of danger. The scene with that native girl is freeky. Well Im not going to ruin the rest of the movie.

[WrongWay]

Just got back from seeing it! It seemed like a movie made by a guy ''who loved movies.'' It was pretty faithful to the original and, historically accurate. The movie also added new questions and, depth to the movie (old map...clues to ''other'' Kongs et. ala). Really brought up some questions regarding love, colonialism and, taking opportunity out of danger. The scene with that native girl is freeky. Well Im not going to ruin the rest of the movie.
So where is your opinion about the movie?

Loved it? hated it? On a scale of 1 to 10?

Come on Spock tell us how you feel. :)

[WVUFAN]

It will easily make 100 million. While the 9 million opening on Wednesday is lower than other event pictures, it's still a pretty good draw. It will still have a pretty big weekend and I'd expect it to actually increase next weekend when the holiday movie season really starts. I'd say it's definitely headed to over $200 million domestically. But you're definitely right, I think this will easily clear $1 billion overseas.You're high. The film might make 100 million domestically, but since it cost nearly TWICE that to make, it'll be considered a flop.

Personally, I'm not gonna see it, nor will I pay for the DVD. Jackson doesn't understand the meaning of the word "edit" as shown by this film and by the Bore of the Rings trilogy. He got my money a couple of times with those films. Not this time. This will show Jackson to be the hack he is, and not worthy of the Oscars he got a few years ago.

[WrongWay]

And, I say you are completely wrong and it has a bigger opening weekend than another 3+hr movie Titanic.


Edit: Titanic had a $28.6 million opening weekend

[larrymcg421]

You're high. The film might make 100 million domestically, but since it cost nearly TWICE that to make, it'll be considered a flop.

Personally, I'm not gonna see it, nor will I pay for the DVD. Jackson doesn't understand the meaning of the word "edit" as shown by this film and by the Bore of the Rings trilogy. He got my money a couple of times with those films. Not this time. This will show Jackson to be the hack he is, and not worthy of the Oscars he got a few years ago.

Actually, I prefer someone like Jackson who "doesn't know the meaning of the word edit" in an era when most action movies are made by ADD Music video directors who cut every 5 seconds.

By the way, Jackson proved himself as a filmmaker well before Lord of the Rings. Heavenly Creatures was an incredible film, one of my favorites of the 90s. He also made a name for himself with low budget horror prior to that, particularly Dead Alive. He made a very creative "documentary" called Forgotten Silver which fooled most of New Zealand. I also think The Frighteners was highly underrated,

I can understand people not liking Kong or LOTR. But you're being a little overzealous, for some reason, with your hatred towards Jackson. He's definitely not a hack. And you've allowed your hatred to cloud your judgement with the box office numbers. Kong will probably end up with $40 million this weekend (that might be low). It will be over $100 million as early as next weekend.

[Honolulu_Blue]

I loved Lord of the Rings. All three films are triumphs of filmmaking. Pure genius. It's the art of filmmaking at its very finest.

That said, while the movie looks amazing and I am sure it's exceptionally well-crafted, I have no real interest in "King Kong" and I am not surprised it's not doing well. I've seen the original. I've seen the 70's/80's re-make of it. It's fine, but the story just doesn't do it all for me.

A giant ape? Eh. Give me Godzilla.

That, and I know how it ends. It's depressing.

[moriarty]

You're high. The film might make 100 million domestically, but since it cost nearly TWICE that to make, it'll be considered a flop.


I think it'll clear over 100 million. Most of the "industry analysts" are saying it will likely have staying power. The fact it's PG-13 cut into some of the numbers (considering it went up against a more kid friendly strong film in Narnia), plus a lot of the east coast had bad weather on opening day. This weekend's numbers should be interesting though.

I'm sure the 3+ hours will keep it from putting up Star Wars type numbers, but I have to imagine it will do very well overseas and eventually on DVD. Plus with a weak field this year, if it gets Oscar buzz it will kick up again around the time of the academy awards.

Anyways, flop is probably in the eyes of the beholder but I think the studios will still make a nice return on this picture.

[Buccaneer]

Here the boxofficemojo review


It took director Peter Jackson with a multi-million dollar budget to remake King Kong as an epic, and what a monstrosity he has made. Sparing no expense, to paraphrase the huckster in Jurassic Park, Jackson takes nearly three hours to render a big dose of pretentious glop.

The latest Kong remake is a debacle from every angle. Opening in a zoo, Jackson depicts Depression-era New York City through flashes of pretty girls doing Vaudeville for a bite to eat and people in poverty—like old postcards in frantic, perpetual motion. The Mad Hatter pace pauses for a hokey hookup between a big-eyed blonde (Naomi Watts) and a bug-eyed movie producer (Jack Black). She's hungry and desperate, and he's looking for an actress in his expensive movie, which has lost its backing.

Meanwhile, King Kong has already lost its bearings, and, while it's clear that everyone's heading to an island to make a movie, it's equally clear that it's not going to work. The remake copies the original's basic plot: a boat trip with the ringmaster, the starlet and the hero (Adrien Brody's screenwriter, improbably) sailing to an exotic place where they'll find dinosaurs and a gigantic ape. Jackson adds chloroform, a shady captain and a kid named Jimmy. Ship's ahoy and breathlessly pleading for attention.
On board, Watts and Brody lock lips, Black's greedy producer schemes and several shipmates—notably Kyle Chandler as a vain movie star—establish a marginal sense of order. Fog sets in and, suddenly, the ship's being tossed about in a violent storm. Welcome to Skull Island—where the second act is a doozy.

Encountering strange, mystical rocks, Black's cast and crew—not the brightest bunch—follow him blindly to land, where snarling super-savages attack, vault themselves onto the ship, kidnap Watts and offer her as a sacrifice for an enlarged silverback gorilla, which bounds into the proceedings noisily and with obvious benefit of computers. Kong grabs the girl, she screams, and so begins the most ridiculous action since Godzilla took Manhattan.

It's hard to say where King Kong goes completely bananas—it's between the polite dialog while running in a dinosaur stampede and Watts doing her stage routine for Kong—but the island scenes are excruciatingly long and poorly conceived. Brody's writer risks his life after a brief spell with Watts, who's doing something like the can-can to keep Kong entertained, while the big lug's recovering from a bout with not one—not two—but three Tyrannosaurus Rexes, at the same time. Jackson shows no restraint, piling on spiders, lizards and bats, while Kong apparently is the only species to go it alone.

Kong's computer-generated expressions look realistic, if gorillas were half-human, and the effects allow Jackson to tout primitivism over civilization and, using Watts, who plays the pretty lady slipping on a banana peel, to make fun of people. Kong—presented as superior to man—is captured for show and tell and profit.

Back in New York and starring in Black's circus show, King Kong unfurls its lame message. Knocking wealthy New Yorkers—only the rich pay to see Kong in this version—and the military in the grand finale, Jackson has the Watts character choose to go down with the ape, though not before she gets a terrific view from the Empire State Building. This extravaganza is moviemaking at its lowest: small ideas amplified and anthropomorphized with a big budget.

[larrymcg421]

It's hard to say where King Kong goes completely bananas

Yeah, maybe they should just stick to analyzing the numbers.

[moriarty]

Here the boxofficemojo review

Ack, well maybe I take back my comments about it having legs.

Still most of the "real people" I've talked to who went to see it have said good things so far.

[Honolulu_Blue]

Ack, well maybe I take back my comments about it having legs.

Still most of the "real people" I've talked to who went to see it have said good things so far.
Most movie critics who went to see it have said good tings too so far. According to rottentomatoes.com 82% of critics gave it a positive review.

Bucc's just sour on the movie so he picked a bad review.

[Buccaneer]

It wasn't so much picking a bad review but checking boxofficemojo as I do everyday and simply posting their own review.

[mgadfly]

I saw it last night with my wife and another couple. The other guy "loved it" and both wives gave it a thumbs up, even though neither are big action/adventure movie fans.

I thought the movie was missing something but I still enjoyed it enough so that I didn't feel ripped off. The boxofficemojo review is pretty much right on, but I've seen far worse pretensious glop do just fine with special effects and a high body count. The graphics are stunning even though you know they HAVE to be computer generated. The centipedes and penis with teeth made me shiver, and the scenes from the top of the building at the end actually made me feel afraid of heights just by watching the scene.

I didn't like that I knew the ending, that there were no major twists, and that from time to time the scene seemed forced or too improbable (I know that is going to happen in a movie with dinosaurs and a giant ape, but there were times when even suspending reality I can't believe a person would be so lucky--like the "bat scene").

But, as I said, it was a fun film that was worth the time and cash, even if flawed.

[JeeberD]

Off topic, but I think biological warrior and Chemical Soldier should hook up. They would make one badass tag-team...

[biological warrior]

So where is your opinion about the movie?

Loved it? hated it? On a scale of 1 to 10?

Come on Spock tell us how you feel. :) A solid movie with lots of twists and turns, some parts should have been cut out though and unneccesary, but still felt I got more than my money's worth.http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/images/smilies/wink.gif

[biological warrior]

I saw it last night with my wife and another couple. The other guy "loved it" and both wives gave it a thumbs up, even though neither are big action/adventure movie fans.

I thought the movie was missing something but I still enjoyed it enough so that I didn't feel ripped off. The boxofficemojo review is pretty much right on, but I've seen far worse pretensious glop do just fine with special effects and a high body count. The graphics are stunning even though you know they HAVE to be computer generated. The centipedes and penis with teeth made me shiver, and the scenes from the top of the building at the end actually made me feel afraid of heights just by watching the scene.

I didn't like that I knew the ending, that there were no major twists, and that from time to time the scene seemed forced or too improbable (I know that is going to happen in a movie with dinosaurs and a giant ape, but there were times when even suspending reality I can't believe a person would be so lucky--like the "bat scene").

But, as I said, it was a fun film that was worth the time and cash, even if flawed. Those bat things looked just like BAT BOY from Weekly World News.

[Senator]

Jackson has the Watts character choose to go down with the ape

Is this true?

[Ryan S]

And you've allowed your hatred to cloud your judgement with the box office numbers. Kong will probably end up with $40 million this weekend (that might be low). It will be over $100 million as early as next weekend.
For a film costing over $200 million, a $40 million opening weekend is a disaster.

[WrongWay]

For a film costing over $200 million, a $40 million opening weekend is a disaster.
So you think Titanic was a flop because it had an opening weekend of $28.6 million?

[Buccaneer]

So you think Titanic was a flop because it had an opening weekend of $28.6 million?
Another stupid thing to say. Titantic was a movie that had more legs than any other in recent memory, solely because it appealed to many females without the males and kids feeling uncomfortable. Kong is just a summer-type popcorn movie which depends upon a strong opening because of competition with upcoming holiday and Oscar-type movies.

[WrongWay]

Another stupid thing to say. Titantic was a movie that had more legs than any other in recent memory, solely because it appealed to many females without the males and kids feeling uncomfortable. Kong is just a summer-type popcorn movie which depends upon a strong opening because of competition with upcoming holiday and Oscar-type movies.
Name these holiday movies you are talking about.


I say King Kong stays at #1 slot for the rest of the year.

[GrantDawg]

And, I say you are completely wrong and it has a bigger opening weekend than another 3+hr movie Titanic.


Edit: Titanic had a $28.6 million opening weekend
Sure it will. Titanic was a rule breaker movie. It made more money as it went on than it did in the first couple of weeks. Are you suggesting this movie will make as much money as Titanic? If you are, you are on crack.

[WrongWay]

Sure it will. Titanic was a rule breaker movie. It made more money as it went on than it did in the first couple of weeks. Are you suggesting this movie will make as much money as Titanic? If you are, you are on crack.
I wouldn't got hat far, but I do think there is a chance that Kong will make more money in it's second and maybe it's 3rd weekend than it does in it's opening weekend because of the Holidays. With both Christmas Day and New Years Day falling on a Sunday you should see good Movie numbers for both Saturday & Sunday the next 2 weeks.


Unless, that crazy Buccaneer guy is right and Cheaper by the Dozen 2 bumps King Kong out of Theaters. :p

[GrantDawg]

I wouldn't got hat far, but I do think there is a chance that Kong will make more money in it's second and maybe it's 3rd weekend than it does in it's opening weekend because of the Holidays. With both Christmas Day and New Years Day falling on a Sunday you should see good Movie numbers for both Saturday & Sunday the next 2 weeks.


Unless, that crazy Buccaneer guy is right and Cheaper by the Dozen 2 bumps King Kong out of Theaters. :p

Cheaper by the Dozen 2 just might. Don't under-estimate a corny family flick opening Christmas weekend.

[WrongWay]

Cheaper by the Dozen 2 just might. Don't under-estimate a corny family flick opening Christmas weekend.
That is why I love the fact that King Kong is rated PG-13.

[Dutch]

Just got back with the kids and we liked it very much. It was a bit darker than I had expected for my kids, but that just made the movie a must have for my collection.

[Godzilla Blitz]

Saw it last night at 8:30PM in a theater that of about 300 seats that was 1/3 full.

Pros: Some spectacular action. Tells the story well. Impressive Kong. A handful of truly amazing scenes.

Cons: Too long. Not in a sense of "I don't like 3-hour movies," but more in that there were 30-40 minutes of unnecessary footage in the movie. This isn't from extraneous scenes so much as that they'd stick with one scene or event for too long. Quite often I felt myself thinking, "Ok, I got it. We can move on now..." But they would hang around, showing/doing the same thing with that scene for another minute or more.

Overall: 4 stars out of 5. Could have been a 5-star perfect with more aggressive editing to get it down to a two-and-a-half-hour movie.

[IMetTrentGreen]

This extravaganza is moviemaking at its lowest: small ideas amplified and anthropomorphized with a big budget.

this sums up jackson perfectly. he was in his element before he hit it big. the third lotr movie was just a b movie. hacky and corny at every turn. king kong was ok in parts, but mostly more of the same

[Dutch]

Good lord, it was King fucking Kong, people, not Schindler's List. Live a little! :)

[MikeVic]

Just saw it, and aside from the fairly boring beginning, it was awesome. Once they got to Kong, I loved every minute.

Having seen the original recently, I think Jackson really did a good job with his vision of the movie.

[ThunderingHERD]

WrongWay is like the guy who loses $100 a weekend gambling, then brags about the one game he got right cause he just knew it was gonna happen. Well, he'd be like that guy if only he'd gotten anything right yet.

[cthomer5000]

For a film costing over $200 million, a $40 million opening weekend is a disaster.
Trust me, it really doesn't matter. It's only a matter of how much money they are going to make on this film. They'll either make a decent amount or a boatload. I think it'll have 2-3 strong weekends, and make a total killing overseas and on DVD>

[WrongWay]

WrongWay is like the guy who loses $100 a weekend gambling, then brags about the one game he got right cause he just knew it was gonna happen. Well, he'd be like that guy if only he'd gotten anything right yet.
Herd you are such a Loser. Remember as long as you have your Food stamps and can say "Do you want that Super Sized" you should be alright.

And, why are you MIA in the FOFC BBCF league?


About the only thing ThunderingHerd is willing to take a stance on is who is going to win the 2002 Super Bowl game on ESPN Classic. :D

[Logan]

Just got back from a 10:30 showing. Overall, I was disappointed. The movie itself as a whole was okay, but there were just too many pieces of it that bothered me. Without going too much into the plot, it seemed like a mix between Raiders of the Lost Ark, Titanic, Jurassic Park, and Harry and the Hendersons. And it was definitely too long. I don't have a problem with 3 hour movies...I have a problem with movies that are unnecessarily 3 hours. And there was no reason for this movie to be over 2:15.

[larrymcg421]

For a film costing over $200 million, a $40 million opening weekend is a disaster.

So Titanic had a disastrous opening weekend?

Actually my prediction was extremely low anyways. It has aleady made $30 million through Friday.

[WrongWay]

Here are some Opening Weekend numbers to run up the flag pole.


http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=kingkong05.htm

TOTAL LIFETIME GROSSES
Domestic: $66,200,000 45.3%
+ Overseas: $80,000,000 54.7%

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

= Worldwide: $146,200,000

And for just Fri, Sat, and Sun

DOMESTIC SUMMARY
Opening Weekend: $50,148,000
(3,568 theaters, $14,054 average)
% of Total Gross: 75.8%

These numbers look pretty good to me.

[WrongWay]

Hey, how do they get the opening weekend numbers at 8pm on Sunday?

[st.cronin]

I think it's really funny that people get emotional over box office grosses.

[MikeVic]

I think it's really funny that people get emotional over box office grosses.

I do for certain movies. For example, Serenity. One of the best, most fun movies I've seen, and I loved the Firefly series. I want to see the box office numbers high so that they make a sequel, or bring back the show.

[Joe Canadian]

Saw this Tursday night... great movie. Ebert's review was spot on, and it's easily the best movie of 2005. I can't say enough about this movie the acting was great (even Jack Black was amazing) and Jackson definitly deserves at least a nomination for his directing... I even think he should win but probably won't since he won last year for RoTK.

Top notch all the way!!!

[GrantDawg]

Hey, how do they get the opening weekend numbers at 8pm on Sunday?

They are estimates. Officials come out a little later, but they generally close.

[ThunderingHERD]

Herd you are such a Loser. Remember as long as you have your Food stamps and can say "Do you want that Super Sized" you should be alright.

Uh, ok.

And, why are you MIA in the FOFC BBCF league?

The last I heard it wasn't launching until after the new year. Is there some activity going on that I'm not aware of?

About the only thing ThunderingHerd is willing to take a stance on is who is going to win the 2002 Super Bowl game on ESPN Classic. :D

Has someone been telling you that your unfunny non-jokes get better with age or is that just another bad call on your part?

[larrymcg421]

So it's at $66 million through Sunday. Anyone still think it might make $100 million?

[rkmsuf]

It needs to be longer.

[Butter]

KING KONG!
Battles the Viet Cong!
KING KONG!
Wears a massive thong!
KING KONG!
Listens to Cheech & Chong!
KING KONG!
This is his theme song!

[Raiders Army]

FWIW, box office numbers are a little misleading. I seem to remember an article which said that the guys who made Spider-Man actually lost money at the box office, when it made $403 million. That movie cost $139 million to make and $50 million to market. I want to say that less than half of the box office went to the studio, so they actually lost money.

Then again, it earned another $418 million overseas, $60 million for TV rights, $109 million in toy sales, and about $338 million in DVD sales.

[oykib]

Is no one else disturbed that as we move into 2006 we are still making Giant ape movies?

To clarify, it's a fairly established idea that the Giant ape is generally meant to represent "savage" Black male sexuality. I realize that the newer versions of thesemovies aren't as bad as earlier outings. But I personally have no intention of seeing it.

[Raiders Army]

Is no one else disturbed that as we move into 2006 we are still making Giant ape movies?

To clarify, it's a fairly established idea that the Giant ape is generally meant to represent "savage" Black male sexuality. I realize that the newer versions of thesemovies aren't as bad as earlier outings. But I personally have no intention of seeing it.
I'll bite...so what do minature apes represent?

[SFL Cat]

I'll bite...so what do minature apes represent?

pygmies?

[Rasmuth]

Saw the movie on Friday...thoroughly 100% enjoyed it...excellent film....

in fact...I might go see it again...the footage on the island was spectacular.

[Kodos]

This is probably my most anticipated movie of the year besides War of the Worlds. :)

[SFL Cat]

This is probably my most anticipated movie of the year besides War of the Worlds. :)

Which I still haven't seen.

[rkmsuf]

Which I still haven't seen.

It was, meh.

[jeff061]

meh at best.

[Kodos]

I thought it was quite good. :)

[Honolulu_Blue]

meh to blech at best for me.

War of the Worlds that is. Haven't seen Kong yet.

[WrongWay]

To clarify, it's a fairly established idea that the Giant ape is generally meant to represent "savage" Black male sexuality.

But, his little weewee is so small.

I mean think about it; in all those giant ape movies with full frontal nudity have you ever seen his penis?

Sometime when I am alone at night, I wonder if King Kong may actually be a Giant Female Lesbian Ape, and that scares me. :D

[chinaski]

watched it yesterday, place was almost full too; pretty surprising for the 1st movie of the morning on a monday.

I thought it was good, but not great. Some amazing action scenes and some good acting - mainly from naomi watts and adrien brody. But its almost too long, the first 45 minutes is really uninteresting and character relationships like 'Jimmy' & 'Mr. Hayes!' are completely useless.

A lot of filler, but a good deal of meat as well - i give it a B+ for almost making me cry over a CGI Ape.

[GreenMonster]

Is no one else disturbed that as we move into 2006 we are still making Giant ape movies?

To clarify, it's a fairly established idea that the Giant ape is generally meant to represent "savage" Black male sexuality. I realize that the newer versions of thesemovies aren't as bad as earlier outings. But I personally have no intention of seeing it.

I am disturbed at your insight into this movie.

[GrantDawg]

Cheaper by the Dozen 2 just might. Don't under-estimate a corny family flick opening Christmas weekend.
Well, it wasn't CBD2 (which came in fourth) that might take the Christmas weekend crown, but instead a resurgent LW&TW. King Kong is in a virtual tie over this weekend, but it will be tommorow before the final numbers come out. It will be interesting to see what Christmas day numbers are going to look like.


http://www.boxofficemojo.com/daily/chart/?sortdate=2005-12-24&p=.htm

[Cringer]

I thought it was good, but not great.

That is my take on it. We saw it Saturday, and Loren and I were a little ticked off that it was on the smallest screen in the theater. I don't understand why they would do that with this type of movie. One of the bigger (normal) screens would have made it a touch better maybe but it wasn't a movie killer I guess.

Anyways, some of it was great when it comes to the special effects. Some of it I didn't really like too much. Like the dinosuar 'stampede' were they are running inbetween the legs of them. Just didn't come off good for me.

[oliegirl]

I took our 8 y/o to see this on Thursday...let me preface this by saying that he saw Batman Begins in the theater and had no problem with it, and on the whole does not get scared by much at all. But he was terrified in this movie...we never even saw King Kong...the scene(s) where they first get to the island and see the natives, and the one guy gets killed just freaked him out. I am not sure why b/c he has seen much worse than this - he watches CSI with us alot and is fine with the dead bodies, blood, etc...we ended up leaving as the native guy was getting on to the boat and (presumably) about to kidnap Ann Darrow. The customer service lady at the theater was super nice - gave me the money for the tickets back AND gave us two free passes - which radii used Friday to take Anthony to see Narnia (which they both really liked). I guess the sight of a crying child clinging to it's mother really pulls at peoples heart strings :(

[Lorena]

Antmeister and I wanted to see Wolf Creek but was sold out, so we decided to watch King Kong. The $20.00 admission for a 3 hour long movie wasn't worth it to me. Some scenes were WAAAAAAY too long for my taste.

[molson]

After yesterday, estimated domestic is $118 million, estimated overseas is $153 million. I think good word of mouth will push it over $200 million.

[TroyF]

Just got back from a 10:30 showing. Overall, I was disappointed. The movie itself as a whole was okay, but there were just too many pieces of it that bothered me. Without going too much into the plot, it seemed like a mix between Raiders of the Lost Ark, Titanic, Jurassic Park, and Harry and the Hendersons. And it was definitely too long. I don't have a problem with 3 hour movies...I have a problem with movies that are unnecessarily 3 hours. And there was no reason for this movie to be over 2:15.


Exactly my thoughts. Good movie. Good acting. Good special effects.

But just so many scenes that weren't relevant or interesting.

I don't care how good a film is, when you catch yourself saying "Please, just move on already" over five times in a movie, something is wrong. There was NO purpose for this movie to be so long outside of an egotistical director who wanted to watch his work.

At 2 hours, this is the movie of the year. At 3, it's one I'll likely never watch again.

[Cringer]

Ok, last minute decision had us seeing Narnia last night. I enjoyed it much better the King Kong. Of course I currently have King Kong slightly ahead of The Ringer only because of the effects.

[Buccaneer]

Ape Clobbered by Lion

The numbers are in for Tuesday's box-office take, and one thing is clear: Peter Jackson's "King Kong (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,180031,00.html#)" has been clobbered.

The winner, now by a large margin, is Disney/Walden's "Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe."

"Kong" finished a solid second on Tuesday with $7,919,225. But "Narnia" ruled, with $9,224,127.

The two movies have been locked in a dead heat for the last two weeks, but it now seems that "Narnia" has completely wedged "Kong" out of first place.

This can only be frustrating news for the folks at Universal. "Kong" cost $300 million, including marketing and promotion. At this rate, it will take a long time to recoup its expenses and see a profit.

"Kong" follows a trend, though. The public is often lukewarm to this kind of film. A few years ago, a remake of "Godzilla" by Roland Emmerich was also a box-office disappointment.

"Kong" may also be too violent for most schoolkids. "Narnia"'s success, as well as the continued steady presence of "Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,180031,00.html#)," indicates that the box office is under the command of those kids on vacation. "Harry Potter" — along with "Cheaper by the Dozen 2," "Yours, Mine and Ours," and "Chicken Little" — had the smallest fall-off from day to day, while other "adult" attractions are on a box-office roller coaster ride.

As for those "adult" titles: No numbers were ready yet Wednesday evening for "Brokeback Mountain." Steven Spielberg's "Munich" held its own for a third day, as did the Johnny Cash biopic, "Walk the Line."


...

[Anthony]

after Titanic i decided I won't pay to see a 3 hour movie when i know how it will end. King Kong dies. 2 hours, 3 hours, 4 hours or more - doesn't matter how much filler you have there is no way around it.

[Tigercat]

New King Kong is to American Godzilla as Micheal Jordan is to Harold Minor

The public may not have been ready to go in HUGE numbers to see a large monster movie like King Kong, but it is still a top of the line action movie (although uneven at times) that is being applauded by most critics and viewers.

[Desmond]

Im not sure, but I think that this movie will fall thru cracks on the tail end of the BLOCKBUSTER movement. LOTR, Spiderman, the 3 Star Wars movies, all the huge movies that have come out in the past 5 years pale, by a wide margin in comparison to King Kong imo. I think alot of people are staying away based on not finding the "idea" of the movie as appealing as the others i've mentioned.

This is King Kong yes, but Jackson really takes the story we all know and makes it new, without really adding much, which to me, is amazing.

I think alot of people will look more fondly on this film 2 or 3 years down the line than they are right now.

[Fidatelo]

I saw it the other day and really enjoyed it. Was it too long? Yes. But I never felt bored and really enjoyed a lot of the scenes.

I have to say though, I thought some of the special effects actually looked weak. Kong himself was amazing, but several of the dinos, and all of the shots of the bi-planes, looked crummy to me.

[Aylmar]

I liked it, but in what seems to be a trend for Jackson, it's just too long. I wasn't bothered as much by the opening scenes to setup the characters as I was by what I felt was gratuitous use of CGI on Skull Island. Yes, you have amazing computer guys that can make really good looking monsters. The giant bug scene in the ravine/canyon, however, made me feel like I was watching Starship Troopers circa 1930. I'm not sure why that scene was even necessary other than to kill a few more people and demonize large crickets. I give him credit, though. Unlike ROTK, the ending was fantastic.

[Buccaneer]

made me feel like I was watching Starship Troopers circa 1930.
I think this is a perfect analogy and one that I had been searching for ever since the preview was posted here last summer and everyone was drooling over it. It just looked so wrong and I think it was the futuristic, sci-fi look made to pretend it was the 30s. I think there were better ways of doing this without turning Kong into another Jurassic Park or even SW.

[JeffR]

Finally saw this today.

What a bloated, self-indulgent mess. It's a monster movie done at the pace of LOTR. I wish Jackson had made this before he got insanely successful; that way, maybe there might've still been someone willing to tell him he needed to cut about 40% of it.

[sterlingice]

I liked it, but in what seems to be a trend for Jackson, it's just too long. I wasn't bothered as much by the opening scenes to setup the characters as I was by what I felt was gratuitous use of CGI on Skull Island. Yes, you have amazing computer guys that can make really good looking monsters. The giant bug scene in the ravine/canyon, however, made me feel like I was watching Starship Troopers circa 1930. I'm not sure why that scene was even necessary other than to kill a few more people and demonize large crickets. I give him credit, though. Unlike ROTK, the ending was fantastic.*SPOILERS*











I saw this a couple of nights ago and agree a lot with what was said here. I liked the intro hour-ish of time before they get to the island. Tho, gratuitous use of CGI really has to be bad to bug me- basically in something devoid of plot- this was not that.

Two things stick out in my mind:
1) At the bug scene, I started clock watching- it was starting to get unnecessary and only two plot points happened there, both of which could have occurred a few minutes earlier in the log scene: Adrian Brodie tracking off on his own (could have gotten trapped on the other side of the log from them), and the captain coming back (also could have happened in the King Kong log battle). I did a little clock watching on the T-Rex battle. After they fell into the vines, that just went on for too long.
2) The whole Jimmy/Hayes thing looked like it was building to something and then didn't at all.

That said, after I was done, I had some movie "warm fuzzies" about how this should be what going to the movie feels like even with these couple of complaints. I really agree with the comments of "this is how going to the movies should feel". I really enjoyed the movie and would watch it again, all 3 hours, if I have friends who haven't seen it yet or want to go again. I'm curious how it will hold up to second viewing.

SI

[larrymcg421]

You're high. The film might make 100 million domestically, but since it cost nearly TWICE that to make, it'll be considered a flop.


*cough*

From Box Office Mojo:

Domestic Total as of Jan. 18, 2006: $205,287,420

[oliegirl]

*cough*

From Box Office Mojo:


Maybe so, but for that movie to have only made $5 million domestically after all these weeks that it's been out, it definitely didn't live up to the expectations that were placed on it prior to release. I am not saying it's a failure, but I would guess that the studio's were willing to spend $200 mil to make it b/c they thought they would profit a little more than $5 mil.

[Dutch]

Maybe so, but for that movie to have only made $5 million domestically after all these weeks that it's been out, it definitely didn't live up to the expectations that were placed on it prior to release. I am not saying it's a failure, but I would guess that the studio's were willing to spend $200 mil to make it b/c they thought they would profit a little more than $5 mil.

I guess you can say the movie just made $5 million dollars domestically, but money is money, no matter where it's earned. And I'll bet the world-wide sales and eventual DVD sales will be enough to pay PJ's heat bill.

[larrymcg421]

I'm simply responding to the fact that someone said I was high for thinking it would make $200 million.

But yeah, DVD/Cable/Foreign sales will turn King Kong into a pretty big profit.

[molson]

I guess you can say the movie just made $5 million dollars domestically, but money is money, no matter where it's earned. And I'll bet the world-wide sales and eventual DVD sales will be enough to pay PJ's heat bill.

It's made $500 million worldwide so far.

[WSUCougar]

Finally saw this on DVD this weekend. It was laughably bad. Peter Jackson gets a helluva lot of leeway with me because of the LOTR trilogy, but we couldn't even finish watching King Kong. Ugh.

[Subby]

I thought it was entertaining, but I was kind of shocked that anyone would take their kid to see it. It was way too intense for kids (but of course, it was marketed to them).

[WSUCougar]

Oh, and who decided to cast Adrien Brody as a romantic lead? He looks like a scarecrow with a big schnoz.

[Buccaneer]

Chris, you and I are too old to be cool enough to like this.

[WSUCougar]

Also very true.