MovieChat Forums > King Kong (2005) Discussion > My problems with this film

My problems with this film

posted 2 years ago by Johanesse (435)
6 replies | jump to latest

While I overall liked Peter Jackson`s version of "King Kong", it suffered from a couple of flaws that could`ve made the move stronger.

1. Like many reviewers pointed out, it dragged at points. Not only at the introductory scenes, but also at Scull Island. It was excepted that it would drag in the introductory parts and during the ship. But even at Scull Island there were a lot of scenes which were basically just filler.

2. The storyline of Jimmy was just utterly pointless. He was basically a useless character that added nothing to the story and his storyline was presented as being it`s own separate bit. I didn`t have anything against him as a character. But considering that he had no impact on the plotline itself, there was no need to give him extra screentime than the other characters.

3. While this version gives some time to enhance an affectionate bond between Ann and Kong, it`s still not given enough scenes between them. There`s a genuine bond and some fine moments between them, but it`s still a pity that they`re still not given more time to shine.

[–] millsey72 (9591) 2 years ago

You actually named all the things I love about this movie. In particular, the storyline with Jimmy was my favorite part of this movie. I just found it very interesting

[–] Johanesse (435) 2 years ago

Well, okay. We can agree to disagree.

[–] sONOMArEturns (1253) 2 years ago

I was watching it last night and could point out probably 20 scenes that should've been left on the DVD deleted scenes. I have no problem with films being long, but I felt like so much of the early stuff could've been cut. The scene where Anne talks smack about Jack behind his back without knowing he's listening is terrible. Several other scenes could've been trimmed down, like when Jaimie Bell is shooting the bugs off of Adrian Brody; not only is this hilariously unrealistic (Brody would've been killed instantly) but it goes on for like two minutes when it only needed to be 10-15 seconds.

I think the casting was an issue too. Jack Black and Adrian Brody are both capable actors, but they were miscast. I kept seeing somebody like Christian Bale in Brody's role, though I do get that Peter Jackson was going for someone unsuspecting who could be a lowkey badass. For the director character, I think they needed to get a dramatic actor who could do eccentric comedy, and not a comedian who needed to be dramatic. Jack Black gives a very Jack Blackish performance that doesn't fit the movie's tone. I kept seeing someone like Robert Downey Jr, Johnny Depp, or maybe Joaquin Phoenix.

The CGI is also really bad in some spots. It looks great on Kong though, which I suppose matters significantly.

I actually do like the film alot, but we agree that alot is holding it back from being a serious modern epic masterpiece.

[–] Johanesse (435) 4 months ago

Well said. I don`t think Jack Black was a miscast, but he was a peculiar choice for Denham. Adrian Brody was fine, though.

[–] [email protected] (1640) 18 days ago

I just watched the extended version which I did like but I agree there were pacing issues and it did drag. I actually like all the introductory parts, the ship scenes too, although Naomi putting her foot in her mouth with Adrian behind her was weak.

I did like Jack Black and Brody but the problem is there was no chemistry between Watts and Brody. She had more chemistry with the Captain. I was actually hoping he was the hero instead. They needed Jack to be like Ash in Evil Dead 1. Someone who became an unexpected hero but could fulfill that role when it came. Maybe you're right, Brody was wrong for the part actually.

Also scenes in the lost world parts were played too comic imo. We just saw Serkis' end horrifically, then it cuts to Brody and the bugs, but it looked too cartoonish and played for laughs. The underwater swamp scene I also felt was unnecessary, as well as King Kong fighting with the 2 reptiles (felt too Man of Steel fight scene to me). There was no weight in the fight. I think they needed better cgi, more animatronics, and less constant bashing with no breathing room. If it's constant throwing (like MOS with no gravity), it just looked like white noise, something to be played in the background. The action needs to breathe for both the audience and the characters to take it in what just happened. But since it had none of that, we don't care because it looked like looney tunes. Jackson needed to watch some anime to see how they use the pauses between action to give weight to a fight or traumatic event.

BTW, I like this film a lot actually. It makes me want to rewatch both the 30s and 70s version. I only saw the former once a long time ago as little kid on tv and the latter 3x probably.

[–] [email protected] (1640) 18 days ago

PS. I just finished Errol Flynn's adventure autobiography 'My Wicked Wicked Ways' and it feels like a story that fits into this world. Errol felt like a combination of the character of the Captain and Jack the writer. I wish we had more adventure mystery films set in the 20s and 30s, I really like the aesthetic and the feeling of fear and awe of the unknown. I love the mystery aspect of the unknown, not in some alien world, but in an alien part of our own world.

Aside from The Mummy and Jupiter's Legacy, what other adventure fantasy films are set in this time period? Indiana Jones is an adventure serial but it's missing that mystery gothic component, Carnivale has the mystery gothic component, but no adventure (I love both btw).

Also any books to recommend like this or Flynn's adventure book? Either fiction or non-fiction? Something written as an adventure novel like MWWW.