King Kong is gonna be King Bomb! Heaven's Gate II

[Gyaos]

I saw the trailer and I can tell you right now, I have absolutely no interest to see a 3rd rehash of a big ape taking big turds on New York or on his smelly island. They have already showed the ape months ago and are over-showing this meatheaded hairy moron now. In fact, the blonde bimbo actress is NO WHERE NEAR as good looking as Jessica Lange or Mae West in their respective films. Since we saw tits in those films, once they show her tits in this farce, if I'm even inside this 3 hour version of another Disney's Mighty Joe Young (which also sucked), I'm out. Been there, done that. If there are no tits, an even bigger ripoff. And let me just say there is no one who will ever match the great performance by Charles Grodin in the '76 version.

In a business point of view, a 3-hour version of a "been there done that", computer generated hairy shithead which will never spark audience emotions, without a piss break included, is a just a loss of money. This is no "Jaws". And this is no "Kong" that scared the life out of kids during 1933 education standards.

In other words, while I vent, this film is gonna not just suck, it's going to be a disgrace. Peter Jackson, who IMHO, is a horrible director and really didn't have all the hands in the Lords of the Rings trilogy, shows how much he actually sucks.

Give him the script to The Blair Witch Project if he wants to make remakes.

Thanks. Gyaos

 

[Keebler Elf]

I felt the same thing when I saw the first trailer. I just saw the new trailer and it actually looks a lot better to me now. But who knows...

 

[JohnnyRico]

I saw the trailer and I can tell you right now, I have absolutely no interest to see a 3rd rehash of a big ape taking big turds on New York or on his smelly island. They have already showed the ape months ago and are over-showing this meatheaded hairy moron now. In fact, the blonde bimbo actress is NO WEAR near as good looking as Jessica Lange or Mae West in their respective films.

I'm sure a movie afficionado (sp?) such as yourself meant to say Fay Wray, not Mae West.

 

[WhaWhaWha]

Yeah I was scratching my head when I read that too. I think he's thinking of My Little Chickadee when WC Fields carried Mae West to the top of her career. The last thing Im going to see this summer is a King Kong remake. The second last would be the new superman. Realistic and VR effects were interesting once, but now they just dont make the movie.

 

[glaeken]

The last thing Im going to see this summer is a King Kong remake.

There's not much chance of that. It's being released Dec 14.

 

[soiree]

Remember all the doom & gloom predictions about Titanic?

 

[shack]

Remember all the doom & gloom predictions about Titanic?

Anybody who made such a prediction was correct. The ship sunk on its' maiden voyage.

 

[joebear]

I felt the same thing when I saw the first trailer. I just saw the new trailer and it actually looks a lot better to me now. But who knows...

Let's hope the movie is worth the hype.

Hollywood has be releasing alot of crappy movies this year.

 

[Gyaos]

I'm sure a movie afficionado (sp?) such as yourself meant to say Fay Wray, not Mae West.

Just testing you. You know Mae West's boobs were super-imposed on Fay Wray in the re-release of the King Kong '33. That scene was cut from the theatrical release. Just joking, my error, Fay Wray is correct.

Titanic made it because of the emotional love story for the great actors. In Kong Kong '05, I just don't think an Angelina Jolie (she's not in the movie) will come out and save the day from a big hairy dumb ape that shits all over the place, fights Jurassic Park mutant dinos, and has Snoop-Doggie Dog rejects as island folk in this 1933 over-budget setting with a grocery bagging movie crew.

I dunno. Computer generated hairy animal (not E.T.) that failed as Mighty Joe Young, 3-hour film (1 hour longer than standard), no piss break, no repeat viewers of the film (who wants to sit through 3-hours of a 3rd rehash), no boy-friend/girl-friend ticket buyer pairs (like Spiderman), no love story or believable one for that matter like Titanic, etc. Not $$ making material. Even if it does, say "well" on week one, it may not even come close to the cost of making this farce.

Oh yes, one other issue. XBOX 360 presale game reservations. King Kong comes dead last.

It's a bear.

 

[langeweile]

Some modern remakes tend to get better, especially when special effects are involved.
I am special effect nut, so I can't wait.

 

[Maximus69]

I think it is too early to make any reviews yet since the movie hasn't come out yet. I too get skeptical myself about remakes, but that changed when they hollywood released Batman Begins. That to me was a great movie considering the other flops in the Batman series with exception to the fist one with the Joker. King Kong may very well be a good movie. I've learned never to judge a movie by the trailers. The trailers can decieve you.

 

[great bear]

I just hope they don't make monkeys out of us with this latest release.

 

[Gyaos]

Hollywood rule: Never show the monster in the trailer. Oops, guess what they did?

 

[langeweile]

Like nobody ever knew what King Kong looked like?

 

[great bear]

Like nobody ever knew what King Kong looked like?

Goober?

 

[Gyaos]

Like nobody ever knew what King Kong looked like?

Retrograding from the political forum??

Well, give me the '05 effects in the '76 movie. That's what made me go in '76 'cuz they didn't show the beast....ended up as a guy in an ape suit, but still the story and acting was fantastic....spawned Jessica Lange to be a superstar, plus she sure looked great naked in that shower. In '33, my pop went to see Kong in a Model T Ford 'cuz they didn't show the beast and was scared for 1 week. Girls were screaming and running out of the theatre in "Jaws" 'cuz they didn't show the shark. I was scared shitless during "Alien" 'cuz they didn't show Geiger's creature. Hell, Space: 1999's "Dragon's Domain" TV episode scared the living daylights out of me for 1 full day, because they never showed that monster and it lingered for ever! Awesome!

Today, I do know what this hairy fat nose, shitty smelling ape is 'cuz they showed the beast. In fact, they keep showing the beast. Who's in charge of that marketting, one of Donald Trump's picked Apprentice contestants? The reason they are showing that beast is no one is interested and they don't know how to market movies. Peter Jackson is a crappy movie director, smells like shit and is being sued by the movie industry. Why look! Kong is Peter Jackson afterall. The only pump this film is getting is my TERB thread.

It's gonna suck. If it doesn't suck, Hollywood will make it suck. And if Hollywood can't make it suck, the XBOX 360 will make it suck because the people aren't buying the game. Therefore it does suck. I guess that is an induction proof.

 

[BROWNi]

I'm looking forward to it. Besides, I go to the movies for entertainment, not to make myself a better person. The only thing I don't like so far is that it is 3+ hours.

 

[Gyaos]

One day only $6.3 million. KING WRONG!!

My bets are on that Peter Jackson's crap film King Kong is **King Bomb**, Heaven's Gate II. All the spin you see giving this film a push + the garbage on Colin O'Brien and Jay Leno trying to poke comedy into it, are all corporate contractual communist crap. Boy did they need the "applaud" light on full blast at the NBC studios.

Remember the 1976 Kong and ask where are the great writers, actors and especially directors of today, because there is none. Especially Peter Jackson, a jerk who uses backyard $3.00 computer technology kept from public consumption.

Simply put. King Kong was made KING WRONG!

http://www.latimes.com/cl-et-kongbo17dec17,0,2216264.story?coll=la-story-footer&track=morenews

'Kong' Box Office Swats at Low $6.3 Million Tally
From a Times staff writer
Director Peter Jackson's "King Kong" grossed a surprisingly low $6.3 million dollars on Thursday — raising questions about whether one of the year's most highly anticipated movies would lay claim to become a runaway blockbuster at the box office.

Going into the week, many industry observers considered "King Kong" to be a good bet for setting a box office record. That hasn't happened yet.

In fact, the disappointing domestic haul for "King Kong" led industry executives to quickly recast its expectations that Kong would take in more than $100 million in its first five days. Such a triple-digit bonanza is looking increasingly unlikely.

The early turn of events was disappointing, given the industry's yearlong slump, and was equally puzzling: The $220-million Universal movie has earned positive reviews, Jackson comes with quite the pedigree ("Lord of the Rings" trilogy), and the tale of a giant monkey who goes wild in New York City has been relentlessly hyped in the media.

Universal is opening the movie virtually worldwide. Earlier this week, Universal officials insisted they weren't concerned about the early numbers, and were confident that business would pick up next week, when school is out for many youngsters — a key demographic for the movie.

"Sometimes a movie that opens soft on a Wednesday will surprise you on the weekend," said Universal's head of distribution, Nikki Rocco.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Not surprised. A 3-hour been there, done that, show the monster in the trailers all the time, make it look like the Lion King, and expect "youngsters" to go and see it? What no tits? Jessica Lange showed tits in '76, infact her whole body in that shower clip on the boat before Kong got a boner. They never showed the beast in the '76 trailers. I went. Ditto for 1933, my dad went. This time, oh yeah, show the whole stupid film in the trailer and jump ontop of the Empire State, hairy ape naked dancing like a chicken fighting the Wright Brothers 4 years after 9/11. What a dumb move from Hollywood.

Time to call me, pay me and I'll show how it's done right.

King Bomb a MINUS $150 million loss. Does this include removing Peter Jackson's toe nails? Throw him in with Saddam Huessein

Gyaos.

 

[james t kirk]

Titanic made it because of the emotional love story for the great actors.

I loved titanic, but the "emotional love story" was superfluous as far as I was concerned.

Being a bit of a titanic nut, what fascinated me was the ship, the workings of the ship, the look of the ship, the engine room of the ship (especially), the events surrounding the striking of the ice berg, the sinking and break up of the ship.

All of which James Cameron recreated in excruciating detail, even to the the way they turned the wheel of the ship in the opposite direction of the steer (how they did it back then for some reason)

 

[homonger]

My take on "Kong" is similar but a little different.

Successful directors do vanity projects all the time. Jackson was interested in making a "Kong" re-make before LOTR, as he absolutely adores and reveres the original. So I don't have a problem with Jackson doing it. To me it's like a dog licking his balls. He does it because he can.

My guess is the marketing geniuses behind "Kong" did a focus group where people told them they wanted to see the big guy in the trailer. But I understand KK is not really seen that much in the movie. I don't remember if they showed the dinosaurs in the 'Jurassic Park' trailer or Superman flying in the original 'Superman'' trailer, but those would be the analogies.

I do have a problem with stories where you know the ending. I was a skeptic of 'Titanic' because you know the ending, although I grant Cameron did pull it off. That was also the problem with the Star Wars prequels, because you know Anakin becomes Darth Vader, the Emperor wins, and Samuel Jackson buys it.

In this case, you know not only the ending, but the whole freaking story. My only curiousity about this movie is that Jackson has supposedly recreated 1933 New York, and it looks fantastic.

But ulitmately, for me, if a story is good enough, then it can handle multiple retellings. How many times has 'Pride and Prejudice' been done, or 'The Three Musketeers'? It seems that whenever the "experts" talk about movie box office declines, someone always knowingly says, it's all about the stories. If the stories are good, people will come. I personally don't know how compelling a love triangle between a man, woman, and a big ape is, though.