Kong

July 12, 2010

Well, unlike many of the reviewers here, I do like the original movie. But, though I enjoyed it, it certainly had a number of flaws that kept it from being as good a movie as it could have been. This cut fixes nearly all those flaws and the final product is the best version of Kong I’ve seen other than the 1933 movie (which is a classic but also not perfect).

The pacing is much improved, more so than I would have thought possible. All the important parts of the story are still present and much padding and over-long development is gone. Very little of the material cut is missed. The only time I felt something missing was in the early restaruant scene where Denham convinces Ann Darrow to come by mentioning Driscoll is involved. Although I was impressed by the very clever use of dialogue from another scene inserted into this scene to bring Driscoll in to the discussion, since we no longer have the scenes that showed how much Darrow wanted to work with Driscoll, her reaction in the new edit seems to come from no where. I can live with it but it is a bit jarring.

I very much enjoyed how some of the scenes on the island were trimmed to just enough to carry the story (the giant bugs in the crevice and Kong and the dinos swinging and fighting in the vines). Both scenes went on much too long in the original movie, so much so that they became silly and comical instead of dramatic. This cut gives us just enough. The one scene that should have been cut still more or, even better, completely eliminated, was the dino stampede. This was simply unbelievable in the original movie and is still too long in this edit.

Though I did like the original movie, I expect that this is the version I will watch from now on. It’s not perfect, but it is damn good.

July 5, 2010

*This rating was given before reviews were required*

March 8, 2010

I gave it a 9 out of 10.

As usual, The Man delivers.

I watched it with my son and he really liked how they hurry up and get on the island already, as did I.
Jack Black seems to be even more annoying, but that’s probably his purpose in this movie anyway.

As for getting Kong on the ship, I’m pretty sure it is never shown in the 1933 original or PJ’s version. I forget about the 1976/Jeff Bridges version (which I did like)
Artistic license and all that jazz I guess.

February 26, 2010

Just finished watching this.
I didn’t notice any bad edits (audio or video), and overall, the finished product was MUCH better than the version that I saw in the cinema.
To go from 200 minutes to 108 minutes obviously means a lot of cutting. However, I can’t say that I noticed any missing footage (apart from the scene with the big bugs, and that didn’t add anything to the story anyway. ) There were not any parts of the story that made me think ” how did that happen/ what’s going on),, which, to me, just means good story telling.
As there are no audio/video glitches noticeable, I have to give this 9/10 ( only because 10/10 is reserved for the lord of the rings trilogy)
Well done!
Just my thoughts

September 17, 2011

This was just fantastic! It’s about as perfect as King Kong could be. The main problem with Peter Jackson is his story-telling. He’s an incredible filmmaker but he’s decided to just throw out the tried and true Three Act Structure. His King Kong was amazing to watch… once. When I watched it a second time I skipped a lot of scenes. The way you put this together really follows a proper structure.

I was incredibly impressed by how well the first Act came out (the first 25 minutes or so). We understand essentially who the characters are and what puts them on the boat without making a big deal out of it.

As well, I was glad that you toned down the idea of Ann falling in love with Kong. That always disturbed me about Jackson’s film. Here you make it that she’s just a good person and doesn’t want to see him harmed.