|
|
Post by themanwithnoshame on Feb 2, 2019 3:50:41 GMT
What do you guys say?
|
|
|
|
Post by Popeye Doyle on Feb 2, 2019 3:54:52 GMT
Despite some CGI which was dodgy even in 2005, it holds up pretty well. Its recreation of 1933 New York City is still gorgeous.
|
|
|
|
Post by Primemovermithrax Pejorative on Feb 2, 2019 4:08:04 GMT
It was already aged as soon as it premiered.
Folly to remake the original.
Just pointless, and bad casting.
Jack Black was the worst possible choice for Denham.
Someone older would have made more sense.
Adrian Brody was a useless addition.
Some long-winded scenes on the boat with Tom Hanks son.
And game-like cgi motion. The t-rexes in the vines scene was so silly.
|
|
|
|
Post by ck100 on Feb 2, 2019 4:30:50 GMT
Mostly yes.
|
|
|
|
Post by darkreviewer2013 on Feb 2, 2019 5:37:58 GMT
It's one of those movies you watch once and that's it. For me, at least. So I'll say no.
|
|
ravi02
Sophomore
@ravi02
Posts: 795
Likes: 418
 
|
Post by ravi02 on Feb 2, 2019 6:49:39 GMT
It's certainly longer than it needs to be (I even felt that back in 2005), but I've watched clips of it on Youtube over the years and still had fun with it. I think it holds up fine as an old-fashioned action-adventure romp.
|
|
|
|
Post by them1ghtyhumph on Feb 2, 2019 7:32:08 GMT
I skip the first hour, and then I'm still stunned by it's greatness
|
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Feb 2, 2019 15:24:29 GMT
Yes for the most part. Is it a long sit? Yes, of course. But it’s still the best dinosaur movie since the original Jurassic Park. Peter Jackson plays it straight and it’s for the better compared with something more tongue in cheek.
Andy Serkis’ mocap performance is a great forerunner to his work as Caesar in the PotA reboot trilogy.
Naomi Watts and Jack Black are surprisingly good updated versions of their respective characters;whosever idea it was to make Carl Denham an ersatz Orson Welles was brilliant. Adrien Brody is admittedly the weakest link of the main cast. To me, he started out interesting as this cynical unlikely hero but then just got bland and became a standard action hero out of blue.
The action and effects are still pretty impressive. The highlight being for me the epic T-Rex battle.
|
|
|
|
Post by hi224 on Feb 2, 2019 17:37:33 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Lebowskidoo 🦞 on Feb 2, 2019 18:37:06 GMT
I still like it. At the time I was annoyed it was set in the 30's, but now I appreciate that aspect even more. Adrian Brody is one of my favorite actors so I really like that he's in this. I really don't have any complaints, It's a bit long though.
|
|
|
|
Post by President Ackbar™ on Feb 2, 2019 18:59:40 GMT
It's certainly longer than it needs to be (I even felt that back in 2005), but I've watched clips of it on Youtube over the years and still had fun with it. I think it holds up fine as an old-fashioned action-adventure romp. I used to edit films just for fun, one time i got KK'05 from 3 hours down to 2! |
|
|
|
Post by Feologild Oakes on Feb 2, 2019 19:08:11 GMT
The age of the movie is not important a good movie is a good movie. And King Kong would have been a very good movie if it had been 30-45 min shorter.
|
|
