|
|
Post by kolchak92 on May 19, 2021 15:52:57 GMT
I know I'm in the minority on this, but I greatly prefer the 1976 film. I think it's better paced, Kong himself is better done and the acting is superior.
|
|
|
|
Post by Popeye Doyle on May 19, 2021 15:59:03 GMT
After watching the 1976 version, I got the 2005 version next to watch. As it stands, I like the 1976 a bit more now but still feels inferior to the 2005. 1933 will always be king, though.
|
|
|
|
Post by kolchak92 on May 19, 2021 16:03:10 GMT
After watching the 1976 version, I got the 2005 version next to watch. As it stands, I like the 1976 a bit more now but still feels inferior to the 2005. 1933 will always be king, though. What about the 2017 one?
|
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on May 19, 2021 16:05:32 GMT
I love the 2005 movie. The 1976 remake is too campy and very boring.
|
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on May 19, 2021 16:17:51 GMT
The actors were better in the 76 version.
There's no contest there.
Charles Grodin vs Jack Black?
Jeff Bridges vs Adrian Brody?
I can't remember anything Naomi Watts did other than dance in one scene.
And Tom Hanks and Lumpy the cook?
The cinematography and the look of the island are much more impressive in the 76 version.
Musical score? Same thing.
The FX difference is that the 76 version has too little and the 2005 version has too much. The dinosaur stampede and Kong swinging dinosaurs on vines.
Overdone cgi.
Jack Black says in one scene "no one is going to stop my movie."
They didn't say "movie" in the 30s usually--it was "picture."
"Going to make a swell picture."
There was a plan to do a different remake with Peter Falk as Denham and Susan Blakely as Ann in the 70s but even that version sounded disastrous because they could not use dinosaurs from the original movie --Kong would have had to fight a prehistoric rhino or insect.
I think Gene Hackman would have a been better Denham. I would go with Dana Elcar if they wanted a Robert Armstrong lookalike.
|
|
Downey
Junior Member
@hunter
Posts: 2,329
Likes: 497
|
Post by Downey on May 19, 2021 16:38:22 GMT
The actors were better in the 76 version. There's no contest there. Charles Grodin vs Jack Black? Jeff Bridges vs Adrian Brody? I can't remember anything Naomi Watts did other than dance in one scene. And Tom Hanks and Lumpy the cook? The cinematography and the look of the island are much more impressive in the 76 version. Musical score? Same thing. The FX difference is that the 76 version has too little and the 2005 version has too much. The dinosaur stampede and Kong swinging dinosaurs on vines. Overdone cgi. Jack Black says in one scene "no one is going to stop my movie." They didn't say "movie" in the 30s usually--it was "picture." "Going to make a swell picture." There was a plan to do a different remake with Peter Falk as Denham and Susan Blakely as Ann in the 70s but even that version sounded disastrous because they could not use dinosaurs from the original movie --Kong would have had to fight a prehistoric rhino or insect. I think Gene Hackman would have a been better Denham. I would go with Dana Elcar if they wanted a Robert Armstrong lookalike. Are you attempting to discredit Jack Black by praising Charles Grodin? In all the films I've seen Jack Black in he's a better actor than Charles Grodin ever was. Jack buys into the craziness of his roles in whatever crazy world he's in, while Charles just looks as if he had the most painful toothache in Hollywood history in all his alleged comedies. I know Charles died but even so. If you're going to demean Jack Black then don't compare him to deadpan clowns, it's insulting. |
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on May 19, 2021 16:47:12 GMT
Are you attempting to discredit Jack Black by praising Charles Grodin? In all the films I've seen Jack Black in he's a better actor than Charles Grodin ever was. Jack buys into the craziness of his roles in whatever crazy world he's in, while Charles just looks as if he had the most painful toothache in Hollywood history in all his alleged comedies. I know Charles died but even so. If you're going to demean Jack Black then don't compare him to deadpan clowns, it's insulting. Denham is not crazy-he's a 1930s filmmaker and world traveler. You had to be intelligent to travel in dangerous places in those days. Black portrayed him as if he was an MTV video producer from the 1990s. Grodin was playing an oil executive--he wasn't doing a 1930s filmmaker, but if he was in a 1930s set movie, he sounds more like an actor of the 30s than Black does. Black has no theatrical voice training--or naturally his voice is just all wrong for that kind of role. It is higher pitched and nasal.
I am trying to think of someone from the 30s who has a voice like Black and the only people I can think of are sidekick comedians. He's all wrong for that role.
|
|
|
|
Post by Captain Spencer on May 19, 2021 16:58:47 GMT
I know I'm in the minority on this, but I greatly prefer the 1976 film. I think it's better paced, Kong himself is better done and the acting is superior. I'm with you, I like the '76 film better. I plan on picking up the new Shout! Factory blu-ray soon.
|
|
Downey
Junior Member
@hunter
Posts: 2,329
Likes: 497
|
Post by Downey on May 19, 2021 17:04:01 GMT
Are you attempting to discredit Jack Black by praising Charles Grodin? In all the films I've seen Jack Black in he's a better actor than Charles Grodin ever was. Jack buys into the craziness of his roles in whatever crazy world he's in, while Charles just looks as if he had the most painful toothache in Hollywood history in all his alleged comedies. I know Charles died but even so. If you're going to demean Jack Black then don't compare him to deadpan clowns, it's insulting. Denham is not crazy-he's a 1930s filmmaker and world traveler. You had to be intelligent to travel in dangerous places in those days. Black portrayed him as if he was an MTV video producer from the 1990s. Grodin was playing an oil executive--he wasn't doing a 1930s filmmaker, but if he was in a 1930s set movie, he sounds more like an actor of the 30s than Black does. Black has no theatrical voice training--or naturally his voice is just all wrong for that kind of role. It is higher pitched and nasal.
I am trying to think of someone from the 30s who has a voice like Black and the only people I can think of are sidekick comedians. He's all wrong for that role.
Charles Grodin was an utter oddball who I'm sure couldn't fit in with anyone of influence in the 30s, as for theatrical training how the fuck can you possibly say that Grodin is theatrically trained? And if he was then in all the films that I've seen him in he didn't show it. Grodin reminds me of those olden day lost asylum residents that the wealthy and aristocrats were invited to observe like zoo animals since we're playing this game of "time travelling actors in history". Jack Black was a full of himself man of purpose and imagination, he fits in better with the 30s elite than Grodin ever could. |
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on May 19, 2021 17:26:48 GMT
Charles Grodin was an utter oddball who I'm sure couldn't fit in with anyone of influence in the 30s, as for theatrical training how the fuck can you possibly say that Grodin is theatrically trained? And if he was then in all the films that I've seen him in he didn't show it. Grodin reminds me of those olden day lost asylum residents that the wealthy and aristocrats were invited to observe like zoo animals since we're playing this game of "time travelling actors in history". Jack Black was a full of himself man of purpose and imagination, he fits in better with the 30s elite than Grodin ever could. That is such a bunch of bs. Black's performance is nothing like a 1930s actor. Is he the modern Charles Laughton now?
Grodin, whatever his acting idiosyncrasies are, he still showed the voice and basic mannerisms of traditional movie acting. I think most people who have seen Midnight Run would say he did a good job in the role. There's always people you just don't like so someone maybe can't stand him but I would think enough are fine with him in those roles.
They wanted a comical element and so they put him in there and the oil being useless. He wouldn't have been a good choice if they wanted to be more serious character but they didnt do that. On the other hand, I dont think they picked Black for comedy.
I guess you feel Jack Black would be better in Midnight Run eh? I am sure he's glad to have a such a fan here.
|
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on May 19, 2021 17:29:13 GMT
I would like to see Black do that monologue in MR about how restaurants are a very risky investment.
I think Grodin made that sound like a much more expert-derived opinion than Black would have.
|
|
Downey
Junior Member
@hunter
Posts: 2,329
Likes: 497
|
Post by Downey on May 19, 2021 17:39:18 GMT
Charles Grodin was an utter oddball who I'm sure couldn't fit in with anyone of influence in the 30s, as for theatrical training how the fuck can you possibly say that Grodin is theatrically trained? And if he was then in all the films that I've seen him in he didn't show it. Grodin reminds me of those olden day lost asylum residents that the wealthy and aristocrats were invited to observe like zoo animals since we're playing this game of "time travelling actors in history". Jack Black was a full of himself man of purpose and imagination, he fits in better with the 30s elite than Grodin ever could. That is such a bunch of bs. Black's performance is nothing like a 1930s actor. Is he the modern Charles Laughton now?
Grodin, whatever his acting idiosyncrasies are, he still showed the voice and basic mannerisms of traditional movie acting. I think most people who have seen Midnight Run would say he did a good job in the role. There's always people you just don't like so someone maybe can't stand him but I would think enough are fine with him in those roles.
They wanted a comical element and so they put him in there and the oil being useless. He wouldn't have been a good choice if they wanted to be more serious character but they didnt do that. On the other hand, I dont think they picked Black for comedy.
I guess you feel Jack Black would be better in Midnight Run eh? I am sure he's glad to have a such a fan here. I don't really like Jack Black all that much but I do think he's a better actor at least in the fantasy genre than Charles Grodin. Jack wasn't playing a 30s actor he was playing 30s director, get your film jobs right. Grodin can play deadpan really well and I'm sure that style of acting goes over well with his fans but it doesn't for me. |
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on May 19, 2021 17:50:22 GMT
I don't really like Jack Black all that much but I do think he's a better actor at least in the fantasy genre than Charles Grodin. Jack wasn't playing a 30s actor he was playing 30s director, get your film jobs right. He's supposed to be someone from the 1930s and he doesn't sound anything like someone of the era.
Actually another reason Grodin is more fitting to that era is he doesn't use body language much. Black on the other hand acts like he's on drugs. But I only indicated that to show that the actors were more notable. They could fit into 1930s film or radio.
Grodin and Bridges and Lange could effortlessly work in a movie set in the 1930s. Their performance styles and voices fit much more than Black does. I don't like critiquing Watts even though I found her boring in Kong but she did do a good job in Matinee as a 1960s-era British ingenue so she probably would have been ok if the role was better.
Even worse, I believe Black was supposed to be based on Orson Welles--omigod-talk about not achieving the desired goal. He is no Orson Welles.
But if you think Jack Black could have been the accountant in Midnight Run it's not the craziest thing I have heard around here--someone thought Patrick Stewart was a real macho man action star--that's an eccentric opinion.
|
|
Downey
Junior Member
@hunter
Posts: 2,329
Likes: 497
|
Post by Downey on May 19, 2021 18:04:00 GMT
I don't really like Jack Black all that much but I do think he's a better actor at least in the fantasy genre than Charles Grodin. Jack wasn't playing a 30s actor he was playing 30s director, get your film jobs right. He's supposed to be someone from the 1930s and he doesn't sound anything like someone of the era.
Actually another reason Grodin is more fitting to that era is he doesn't use body language much. Black on the other hand acts like he's on drugs. But I only indicated that to show that the actors were more notable. They could fit into 1930s film or radio.
Grodin and Bridges and Lange could effortlessly work in a movie set in the 1930s. Their performance styles and voices fit much more than Black does. I don't like critiquing Watts even though I found her boring in Kong but she did do a good job in Matinee as a 1960s-era British ingenue so she probably would have been ok if the role was better.
Even worse, I believe Black was supposed to be based on Orson Welles--omigod-talk about not achieving the desired goal. He is no Orson Welles.
But if you think Jack Black could have been the accountant in Midnight Run it's not the craziest thing I have heard around here--someone thought Patrick Stewart was a real macho man action star--that's an eccentric opinion.
You can be sedated in a mental asylum like Charles Grodin too so Jack hasn't got the total advantage on looking like a lunatic. Crazy people like Elon Musk raise investments for their adventures all the time too that's the inspiration I'm talking about. And I also remember a lunatic on this forum trying to persuade me that overweight Yaphet Kotto could captain a starship, this same person traumatized by Babe the movie talking about macho men in action movies which was also hilarious. |
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on May 19, 2021 18:10:14 GMT
You can be sedated in a mental asylum like Charles Grodin too so Jack hasn't got the total advantage on looking like a lunatic. Crazy people like Elon Musk raise investments for their adventures all the time too that's the inspiration I'm talking about. And I also remember a lunatic on this forum trying to persuade me that overweight Yaphet Kotto could captain a starship, this same person traumatized by Babe the movie talking about macho men in action movies which was also hilarious.
I knew it was you lurking behind the new name. Don't compare Musk to a 1930s filmmaker. Totally different personality type. I don't think Musk could exist in the 1930s. Bill Gates couldn't. He would fall into an ineffectual fetal position without his computer tech.
Such an analog world it was then.
A fat Kotto would not have worked in the fat-shaming Star Trek universe (Harry Mudd we are talking about you) but if he was thinner or had Kirk or Scotty's body-hiding red uniform then yes--he could have a been an interesting captain.
Are we now going to be treated to the opinion that Avery Brooks should have been in Midnight Run too?
|
|
Downey
Junior Member
@hunter
Posts: 2,329
Likes: 497
|
Post by Downey on May 19, 2021 18:16:22 GMT
You can be sedated in a mental asylum like Charles Grodin too so Jack hasn't got the total advantage on looking like a lunatic. Crazy people like Elon Musk raise investments for their adventures all the time too that's the inspiration I'm talking about. And I also remember a lunatic on this forum trying to persuade me that overweight Yaphet Kotto could captain a starship, this same person traumatized by Babe the movie talking about macho men in action movies which was also hilarious.
I knew it was you lurking behind the new name. Don't compare Musk to a 1930s filmmaker. Totally different personality type. I don't think Musk could exist in the 1930s. Bill Gates couldn't. He would fall into an ineffectual fetal position without his computer tech.
Such an analog world it was then.
A fat Kotto would not have worked in the fat-shaming Star Trek universe (Harry Mudd we are talking about you) but if he was thinner or had Kirk or Scotty's body-hiding red uniform then yes--he could have a been an interesting captain.
Are we now going to be treated to the opinion that Avery Brooks should have been in Midnight Run too?
No amount of red would've made that hot air balloon appear thin. Yeah, I know he was inflated like a balloon and killed in a Bond film but I mean hot air balloon in the literal sense this time. |
|
|
|
Post by jcush on May 19, 2021 18:17:44 GMT
2005 is my favorite King Kong movie.
|
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on May 19, 2021 19:00:09 GMT
2005 is my favorite King Kong movie. ^^^This
|
|
|
|
Post by FridayOnElmStreet on May 19, 2021 19:42:56 GMT
2005 I liked much better. Im probably alone on this but I liked Kong: Skull Island the best.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mulder and Scully on May 19, 2021 19:53:08 GMT
2005 I liked much better. Im probably alone on this but I liked Kong: Skull Island the best. No, you're not alone on this one. It might be a minority opinion but I also think Kong: Skull Island is the best Kong movie. |
|
